Skip to main content

Full text of "What to do with Germany"

See other formats


Stockton, California 


Gift of 

Mr. and Mrs. Roy D. Whitlow, 
B.J. Whitlow and Gail V.Hayes 

In Memory of 
Maynard D. Whitlow 



From the collection of the 


v Jjibrary 

San Francisco, California 




This book has been designed in a Victory format. Smaller type 
and margins produce fewer pages which permit a vital saving 
of paper and labor in the manufacture of a War-time book. 

What To Do 
With Germany 




L. I B R A R Y !| 

JAN 1 8 1967 



All Rights reserved. No portion of this book may 

be printed without permission of the publishers 







1. Extermination and Sterilization 3 

2. Breeding, a Mendelian Theory 6 

3. Political Dismemberment 7 

4. Compulsory Migration 9 
Justice Not Sentimentality or Cruelty 10 



Another Scrap of Paper 15 

Caesar and Tacitus Report on Nazism 18 

Earlier German Fuehrers 23 

Gangsterism in Intellectual Garb 26 

Race and Murder Become a Philosophy 30 

Paganism Adopts Music 39 

A German Nostradamus Speaks 42 

Hitler's Inheritance 47 

Lightning Struck Twice 52 



The Common Sense of International Law 56 

The World Undertakes a Task 64 

The Previous Indictment 68 

The American- Japanese "Axis" 73 

The Judicial System Never Used 76 

Germany Does a Houdini 79 

German Courts Slap Several Wrists 88 

Judgment Day 91 

1. Occupation of Germany Its Sovereignty 

Suspended 91 

2. Who Shall Be Punished 95 

3. Asylum and Extradition 98 

4. Is Obedience to a Command a Defense? 100 

5. Practical Judicial Machinery for Punish- 

ment 101 

6. Property Courts with Criminal Jurisdic- 

tion 104 

7. Restitution by Labor 107 
Weighting the Scales of Justice 108 



German Industry Plots a War 111 

The Axis Is Founded Long Before Hitler 115 

The Americas Are Invaded 116 

Industry and Espionage 120 

The Cartel, a Secret Weapon 124 

A Fifty Billion Dollar Haul 127 

Title By Hold-Up 128 

The Business High Command 131 

The Reparations Fraud 132 

Economic Disarmament 136 

Iron and Rye 139 

The Quality of Mercy 140 

International Economic Control of Germany 141 

Economic Isolation Is Also Bankrupt 144 

Filling the Stomach Before the Mind 148 


"The Most Important Fact of the Last Half Cen- 
tury" 151 
Self Education After World War I 153 
The Devil's Brew 155 
The Physician Is Not a Trespasser 164 
The Teutonic Plague 167 
The International University 168 
Invading the German Mind 171 



The Mysticism of Sovereignty 177 

Regional Federalism 181 

Forever Hold Jour Peace 186 



Program Summarized 191 

Punishment 191 

Economic Program 192 

Educational Program 197 

Harvesting the Peace 199 



Chapter I 205 

Chapter II 206 

Chapter III 208 

Chapter IV 210 

Chapter V 211 

Chapter VI 212 

Chapter VII 213 



"Peace hath her victories no less renowned than war", 
wrote John Milton. 

The great tragedy of the twentieth century is that 
peace has suffered defeats even after wars have been won 
for her. In 1918 an agonized world laid down its guns. 
Peace was here, but we turned our backs on her as though 
she nourished herself, as though the same intense planning 
and torrents of energy which win wars are not necessary 
to maintain peace. The Germans were democratized, but 
not made safe for democracy. We were smug about the 
newly instituted Republic as though democracy were a 
mere format of government instead of an expression of 
the people's yearning for self-regulation. As a result, 
within twenty years, the peace so dearly won had been 
squandered. Only then did we discover that our unpre- 
paredness for peace had made that period a prelude to 
another war. And ironically enough we were unprepared 
for that, too. 

During a war there is no confusion of immediate objec- 
tives. One must win or perish. Where choice is thus 
limited, the temptation to procrastinate and to compro- 
mise is likewise diminished. There is a penalty of death 
for error or even hesitancy. But peacemaking is leisurely. 
It permits all the devices of indecision commissions, com- 
mittees, experiments, debates. 

The day is approaching when another chance, perhaps 
the last chance, will be given to us to win a renowned vic- 
tory for peace. On that day word that the war has ended 
will be flashed around the world and will be echoed by glee- 
ful church bells and hysterical whistles. Millions of hearts 
will stop for a second in solemn prayer. Then a wave 
of ecstacy will sweep across the world. Emotional riots 
will break out everywhere. Hundreds of New Year cele- 
brations will be crowded into one night of delirious joy. 
Children, astonished by the madness of their parents, will 
scream and dance in contagious imitation. Churches will 
be crowded with worshipers too stirred to pray. Men in 
fits of gratitude will indulge in philanthropic orgies. 
Women, too pained to cry during the war, will learn to cry 
with overwhelming joy. There will be bonfires in our 
hearts and from them will ascend a wave of religious 
gratitude to the heavens. Peace will be here. Peace! 
We will go berserk with triumph and peace. And that will 
be the most dangerous moment in all history ! 

Will we again waste the sacrifice of millions of people 
because we are not prepared to think? Will we simply 
rearrange our prejudices and reclothe our demagoguery? 
Or will we, with knowledge of the causes of the disaster, 
grimly set ourselves to the task of winning the peace and 
preventing World War III now? 



In the short span of twenty-five years the Germans 
have erupted twice, dislocated all humanity, and forced 
us to abandon peaceful pursuits. Judged by ordinary 
criminal standards, her crimes are so great as to exceed 
our concepts of punishment. This is a perplexing phenom- 
enon. We know readily what to do with a truant boy 
or with a vicious murderer. But what shall we do with 
millions of murderers? Our rules for punishment dis- 
integrate w^hen the criminal gang is a whole nation. For 
this reason, the customary penalties for individual offenses 
become inapplicable to mass crime. 

1. Extermination and Sterilization 

We still shudder at the hanging or eloctrocution of a 
convicted murderer. But we lull our squeamish sensibil- 
ities by citing the religious doctrine, "An eye for an eye " 
and justify the punishment as a deterrent to others. But 
what shall we say of the proposed extension of this doc- 
trine to an extermination of the entire German people! 
A dozen resistant reasons instantly spring to mind. 
"The entire German people is not responsible; one can't 
convict a whole people" "such punishment apes the ab- 
normal cruelty of the condemned and makes us his 
imitators" "you can't kill 80 millions" "it would create 

another crisis in Europe to wipe out one of its largest 
and most efficient populations" etc., etc. 

The French were accustomed to saying, "We must 
destroy Germany or make peace with her and to destroy 
her is an absurdity." But as the French have since 
learned, it is not easy to make peace with her. 

Others, stirred to consuming hatred by German brutal- 
ities, suggest that they be destroyed as a race by eugenic 

They argue that if compulsory serum treatments are 
justified by their benefits to the community, sterilization 
of the German people might similarly be considered a pro- 
tective measure to immunize the world forever against the 
virus of Germanism. They point out that the surgical 
procedure is simple, painless and does not even deprive 
the patient of normal instincts, or their gratification. 
Vasectomy, the operation on the male, simply requires 
a slight incision since the sperm duct lies just beneath 
the skin. The operation takes only ten minutes to per- 
form and the patient may resume work immediately after- 
wards. Ligation of the fallopian tubes, the operation 
which renders the female sterile, is more difficult but not 
much more dangerous. 

There are about 50 million German men and women 
within the procreation ages, and it is estimated that 
twenty thousand surgeons performing about twenty-five 
operations daily could sterilize the entire male population 
of Germany within three months and the entire female 
population in less than three years. At the normal death 
rate of two per cent per annum or one and a half million 
people yearly, the German people would practically dis- 
appear within two generations. 

We reject this proposal but not because of German pro- 
tests. They have forfeited all right to protest, for they 

themselves set this precedent. It is estimated that in 
Germany 300,000 people have been sterilized and in Poland 
700,000 people. They have not been beyond the abolition 
of education so as to make populations slave-fit, the 
physical and mental corruption of the masses by porno- 
graphic and drug incitation, and the systematic extermina- 
tion of whole peoples. 

So we will not heed the voice of Nazi protest. Too 
often have they claimed protection by hypocritical resort 
to the moral and ethical inhibitions of their enemies, which 
they themselves scorn as contemptible weakness. But our 
own consciences cannot be easily stilled if we resort to 
unmoral retaliation. If a world of justice is to be built 
revenge must be avoided. For in its wake are thousands 
of injustices and the lingering hatreds which are the devils 
of the future. Would not the innocent be punished with 
the guilty? When would the penalty cease? Would not 
the present generation of German children, dispersed 
throughout the world, defeat the purpose? 

Above all, religious and ethical concepts deprive us of 
the will to abolish a people. The horror of scientific 
mutilation is stronger than all the cold justification which 
logic can marshal. For though inhumanity begets in- 
humanity, we are ashamed of the offspring. The moral 
restraints upon us are the residue of centuries of slow 
civilizing processes. We need not be ashamed of them. 
Let us direct them into channels which will strengthen 
the regard for such values. 

We must not emulate the abnormal even in wreaking 
vengeance upon them certainly not in constructing a 
world of justice. The measuring yardstick of appropriate 
penalty must accord with common religious and ethical 
concepts. A program of compulsory eugenic sterilization 
or wholesale executions would arouse violent dissents in 

religious and other circles and breed new disunity among 
the victors. It would martyrize Germans who would, of 
course, rebel en masse. Unless there were universal con- 
fidence in the justice of the remedy, it would fail as a prac- 
tical measure. Moral sanction must precede physical 

Furthermore, sterilization might solve the German 
problem for future generations but it would constitute no 
present solution. To safeguard posterity is admirable but 
there is a more immediate duty to ourselves and our 

We must forego the solution of sterilization. 

Such abnegation is far from misplaced sentiment. We 
shall see that there are methods available for stern pun- 
ishment. At present it is enough to conclude that capital 
punishment or sterilization for millions of people is im- 
practicable, and violates those moral precepts which limit 
even legalized murder. 

2. Breeding, A Mendelian Theory 

Nor can we accept the suggestion of Professor Earnest 
A. Hooton, anthropologist of Harvard University, that 
we breed German aggressiveness out of its people. He 
would force the bulk of the present German army to work 
as labor units in devastated areas for a period of 20 years 
or more. Single men would be permitted to marry only 
women living in these areas. By such outbreeding he 
would reduce the birthrate of "pure Germans" and neutral- 
ize aggressiveness. 

The theory of race purity is no more valid when turned 
against the Nazis than when offered by them against 
others. Aggressiveness is not a biological trait. At one 
time in history the Dutch and Turks were aggressors. 
Today they are peaceful. The eugenic solution ignores the 


educational, economic and social conditioning which affect 
a people's traits. 

3. Political Dismemberment 

What, then, of other remedies? Shall we slice German y 
into many segments and by such dismemberment inflict 
capital punishment on her nationhood rather than on her 
people? The suggestion is enticing and has already re- 
ceived wide consideration. It rests upon the assumption 
that the recuperative powers of the German people will be 
stunted if Germany is divided into small or minority 
groups. Germany originally consisted of many separate 
States differing in culture, origin and language.* One by 
one they were conquered by the Prussians. Many believe 
that dismemberment of the Reich into its original units 
might revive their national and ethnological differences. 
Thus hatred for the Prussians might be sowed among the 
Germans themselves. 

But such a partition might well give added incentive to 
the extreme nationalism which permeates Teutonic peo- 
ples. German unity has been one of the most successful 
propaganda arguments of Pan-Germanism since the nine- 
teenth century. Philosophers like Fichte and Hegel ad- 
vocated it. 

* It is often overlooked that Germany is composed of two elements 
which differ racially and culturally. The original German tribes, who 
were influenced by Western civilization early in their history, lived in 
the Western and Southern parts of present-day Germany. The in- 
habitants of the territory east of the River Elbe, however, were Slavic 
in origin and tongue. These Slavic groups were conquered and en- 
slaved 700 years ago by German knights whose descendants are the 
Junkers of today. They lost their cultural heritage slowly and, in 
fact, there is, within fifty miles of Berlin, a large group (300,000) which 
still retains its Slavic tongue. In the days of Frederick the Great, only 
one-third of his "Prussians" spoke German. The balance remained 
faithful to their Slavic languages. After Bismarck had created the 
German Reich in 1870, the conflict continued between the Western 
Germans and the Junkers. Bismarck wrote in his Memoirs that the 
Prussians were hated by the Rhinelanders who called the Junkers. 
"Spree-Kosacken" (Cossacks of the River Spree). 

In 1866 Prussia became the predominant state in 
Germany by virtue of her victory over Austria. The slogan 
of the "unity of German blood" was exploited by Bis- 
marck as the driving force for a new Pan-German effort. 
He dissolved the former distinctions among Bavaria, 
Prussia, Saxony, Wurtenberg and Hanover. 

The separation, after the last war, of fragments of the 
German people, as in Danzig and the Polish Corridor, 
punished but did not weaken Germany. It decreased Ger- 
many's population by a fractional per cent, but the same 
policy toward Hungary, Austria and Bulgaria helped to 
sow the dragon's teeth for the future. 

The fanatical belief of the present generation in 
German unity would make recourse to the old divisions an 
impracticable device. It would be a mere invitation for 
the Germans to wipe out the fictional boundary lines. After 
previous defeats, they have been dismembered only to re- 
group, their strength increased by the inspiration of a new 

So popular with Germans is this notion of unity that it 
has been cleverly exploited as an additional excuse for 
world conquest. For in every country there are Germans, 
and, according to the blood theory, they always remain 
such. There are approximately 33 million Germans out- 
side of the German Reich. Of the 15 million in the western 
hemisphere, 10 million live in the United States. They can- 
not, according to this theory, divest themselves of ex- 
clusive loyalty to the German state even by acquiring 
citizenship in another. 

If nothing is done to eradicate this fundamentally cor- 
rupt belief then mere segregation will be to no avail. In- 
deed, it will provide the impetus for unity movements 
which will plague the world. It will create a whole series 
of minority problems. It will create economic barriers as 
well as political intrigues. 


Furthermore, division does not destroy or even suspend 
German sovereignty. On the contrary, it creates many 
smaller German sovereignties and to this extent multiplies 
the problem. For each sovereignty will claim its own 
police force, if not, indeed, its own army. We have seen 
how German deception makes the two indistinguishable. 
The proximity of the several small German nations would 
add to the difficulty of preserving their separateness. It 
would create economic and political problems for other 
nations, for whom the divided entities would be real, while 
for their own purposes the many Germanys could consider 
the distinctions amongst them dissolved. 

If we join segments of Germany to other surrounding 
nations, then we Balkanize another virile portion of the 
European continent, with all of the class and national 
feuds magnified. Currencies, trade, political and military 
alignments all ascend to their old roles of devilment. 

4. Compulsory Migration 

Similarly unacceptable is the proposal that the Ger- 
mans be shipped out of Germany to colonization areas. 
This theory inclines to the belief that Germans being scat- 
tered will be shorn of military power while preserving 
their constructive abilities. Once more we need not heed 
the horror of the Nazis at such extreme measures. It was 
they who taught us that whole populations could be trans- 
ported mercilessly 500,000 Czechs were summarily moved 
from Czechoslovakia to Germany; 4,320,000 Poles were 
transported from their native land (after 900,000 had been 
put to death). Nor had the Nazis any scruples about the 
compulsory transmigration of 2,350,000 Frenchmen, 
468,400 Dutchmen, 13,000 Norwegians, 532,000 Belgians, 
60,000 Danes, all robbed of their possessions, driven from 
their soil to other nations of foreign tongue and custom. 

Ko, German protest against the colonization theory is the 
least impressive of the arguments against it. 

But virtually emptying the Central European basin 
would not be a contribution to economic reconstruction. 
Aside from the problems of allocation and compulsory 
migration of at least fifty million people, what are the as- 
surances for ultimate advantage to peace? This plan 
might well be compared with that of eradicating a com- 
municable disease by spreading its carriers thinly through- 
out the world. 

Psychologically, these proposals of segregation are 
efforts to escape from the problem rather than solve it ; to 
substitute the satisfaction of an extreme effort for a solu- 
tion. Just as extermination is a vengeful remedy, so 
political dismemberment and dispersion are escapist 

Justice Not Sentimentality or Cruelty 

The surest sign of our not having thought the problem 
through is the prevalence of the pat extremes commonly 
advocated "kill them" or "forgive and forget." 

We must shun the maudlin theorist who suffers heart- 
throbs for the meanest criminal and "his family" while 
wagging a somber but unfeeling head for the victim be- 
cause he "can no longer be restored to life anyway." In 
the international sphere there is his counterpart the 
statesman who suggests that only complete foregiveness 
will forestall military resurgence. 

Justice would drop her scales and turn her blindfolded 
head in shame if such incredible cruelties as our enemies 
inflicted on the whole world were not punished. Swift, cer- 
tain and appropriate penalties must be handed out. We 
shall examine this subject later. 


We must be stire that the new peace is not a mere 
interim during which the Germans, unrepentant, prepare 
another onslaught. If we are not wise enough to prevent 
forever German resurgence, Der Tag is inevitable and our 
sacrifices will have been in vain. We have never won until 
we are assured that the attack will not recur. 

No reliance can be placed on German "repentance" or 
newborn realization of past error. No confidence can be 
had in their self-reform, or in good-will bribed with 

Is tliere a solution for the German problem which will 
remove its recurrent threat to world peace? 

There i*. 




Are the German people or only their leaders to blame? 
If only the leaders, then the prophylactic steps against 
their militarism are comparatively simple. If the people, 
then we must cope with millions of problems. Before any 
consideration can be given to a proper solution of Ger- 
manism, its magnitude and nature must be assayed. 

All generalities suffer from the same defect. They are 
too inclusive to be accurate. Therefore, it becomes impos- 
sible to indict a whole people in the sense that every indi- 
vidual is personally responsible. But we cannot reject 
common responsibility simply because of individual in- 
nocence. If no fact about a people could be stated unless 
it had been unanimously established by them, then we 
could never generalize about group conduct. We need not 
therefore heed the objection that no general conclusions 
can be drawn about the responsibility of the German 
people. We do not hesitate to say that Italians are a 
musical people though many of them are tonally deaf; or 
that Scotchmen are thrifty, though among them are spend- 
thrifts; or that Englishmen are phlegmatic, though they 
have their share of excitable individuals; or that Ameri- 
cans are an energetic, restless people, though there exist 
among them innumerable sluggards. We have a right to 
speak about the German people as such. 


When we attribute faults to a whole people we refer 
to the characteristics which identify a great majority of 
them. We must not be deterred from the inquiry by ques- 
tions about the five million Communists who voted in the 
last pre-Hitler election, the four million German Catholics, 
the six hundred thousand German Jews, and the eight 
million Social Democrats. 

In the last free Reichstag elections held in November, 
1932, the Leftist groups mustered 13,231,650 votes. The 
Rightist groups polled 22,035,235 votes. Such statistics 
might give the impression that a large minority of Ger- 
mans disapproved of Hitlerism and acted under duress. 
But research into this important subject cannot be thus 
summarily terminated. There was the Kaiser before 
Hitler, and Bismarck before the Kaiser and Frederick the 
Great before Bismarck indeed, two thousand years of 
Germanism to account for. Under each ruler millions 
of Germans fought fanatically, heroically, sacrificially. 
Theirs was not conduct induced by compulsion. Theirs 
was a will to execute a program and a readiness to die for 
it. The vaunted efficiency of German aggression depends 
on millions of little cogs acting in perfect coordination 
which involuntary compliance could not possibly produce. 

Preparation for military conquest requires enthusiastic 
popular support and willingness to sacrifice. No sulky ad- 
herence can suffice. Some great incentive, such as world 
domination or, conversely, resistance to extinction, is 
necessary. The Germans and Russians supply illustra- 
tions of each. Germany, beginning in destitution and 
defeat, built the most powerful attacking force in all his- 
tory. For the greater part of a generation its people 
denied itself necessities as well as luxuries to construct its 
war monster. Does not such a mechanical and industrial 


achievement indicate willing determination and co-opera 
tion rather than obedience to a tyrant? 

During the first World War it was generally accepted 
in intelligent quarters that we had no quarrel with the 
German people; that only their unprincipled leaders were 
our enemies. Wilson made the classic statement of this 
view: "We have no quarrel with the German people," he 
said. "It was not upon their impulse that their govern- 
ment acted in entering this war." His appeals were 
directed to the German people as if they were merely op- 
pressed brothers whom we would free from their own over- 
lords. In thus directing all responsibility for breaking 
treaties and desecrating international law upon the de- 
posed leaders, the German people were actually absolved 
from blame. That they later considered the humiliation 
of their leaders their own is a significant commentary. 
We shall see that they went so far as to sabotage the 
punishment provisions of the Versailles Treaty in a 
desperate effort to protect the very men who, we insisted, 
had enslaved them. 

All the powers of the German democracy were 
exerted on behalf of its military caste. The French 
in 1871 exiled their monarch and his family permanently. 
The Germans, by plebiscite, voted millions to their 
deserting Kaiser. And in three democratic elections 
they designated Hindenburg as President Hindenburg, 
who was an avowed monarchist, whose sole claim to 
their affection was that he had been a field marshal. As 
the regularly chosen President, he legally appointed Hitler 
Chancellor. At that time the Nazi Party had won 288 
seats in the Eeichstag and was the strongest in Germany. 
This expression of the people, directly and through their 
constitutional President, was made with the full knowl- 
edge of Hitler's program as revealed in Mein Kampf. Thus 


public opinion in Germany revealed itself even before 
censorship and tyranny choked its voice. 

Another Scrap of Paper 

For many years, until Hitler's adoption of the same 
theory made us wary, it was popularly accepted that the 
Versailles Treaty was iniquitously severe. Here and there 
were early dissents. One remembers the anecdote of 
Marshal Foch submitting armistice terms to Count Brock- 
dorff-Rantzau, who turned pale at their harshness and 
stated that they exceeded all civilized standards. Foch 
then advised him that he had the real terms in his other 
pocket, but that he had submitted a copy of the German 
terms which had been prepared in anticipation of victory, 
and which had fallen into the hands of the French secret 
service. The veracity of the point was illustrated by the 
Carthaginian terms laid down to the Russians at Brest- 
Litovsk in 1917, to the French in the railway car at Com- 
piegne in 1940, and by the Germans' general inhumanity 
toward conquered nations. 

The Versailles Treaty has been branded as being either 
too severe or too generous. Actually it was not the cause 
or inciter of the next war. Too much has been attributed 
to this document, which, by German standards, was merely 
a piece of paper not to be taken seriously except as a con- 
venient pretext of "oppression." 

Germans would have been more impressed by a pitiless 
victor than by a charitable one. Their respect would have 
grown for a harsh enemy as their respect was devotedly 
given to their own autocrats in direct proportion to the 
cruelties these autocrats inflicted. A softer peace, in the 
opinion of Emil Ludwig, would not have prevented Hitler 


but would have caused him to come five or ten years 

Is it any wonder that generosity failed as an inter- 
national policy? Aside from its sheer military and prac- 
tical inefficacy, it ignored the abnormal national psychol- 
ogy of the Germans, which makes them contemptuous of 
tolerance and respectful of brutality. 

The Versailles Treaty would have been violated irre- 
spective of its terms unless the age-old German program 
of world conquest had been destroyed. That is the bald 
fact. The onus may not be placed upon the Treaty which, 
for all its faults, was a humane Christian document com- 
pared with demonstrated Nazi impositions upon the con- 
quered. It must be placed upon the inability of the treaty 
designers to recognize that formulation of rules was in- 
sufficient; that root causes of German perfidy must be 
discovered and dealt with if reform is to be effected; that 
a prescription without proper diagnosis is meaningless 
even though written in imposing medical terms. 

*In this respect there is a natural affinity between the Japanese and 
the Germans. In 1862 an Englishman. H. L. Richardson, who refused 
to yield the sidewalk to a Japanese officer, was slain. The English sent 
several battleships to Kagoshima and shelled it to smithereens. Europe 
was horrified by this retaliatory measure. Even the English nervously 
awaited the angry reaction of the Japanese and took special defense 
precautions. To their amazement, the Japanese not only offered profuse 
apologies and paid indemnity but responded with profoundly respectful 
overtures to the English, and for the first time expressed open admira- 
tion for them. 

To the Japanese, the remorseless avenging of a wrong is the highest 
symbol of honor. English retaliation by brutal force was, to the Jap- 
anese, an impressive demonstration of high character. Had the English 
written polite notes of protest, the Japanese would have had nothing 
but contempt for their weakness in not avenging an insult. 

In spite of this object lesson in Eastern psychology, England and 
the United States continued in later years to mollify Japanese public 
opinion bv generous overtures. Guam must not be fortified lest it offend 
Japanese sensibilities. Japanese aggressions and horrors in China must 
receive only polite slaps on the wrist. In the meantime, steel and iron 
and gasoline must be shipped to Japan lest she be irritated by our dis- 


The Versailles Treaty permitted the Germans to choose 
their own leaders. And fourteen years later they were 
heiling Hitler! Granted that distressful circumstances 
conditioned them for demagoguery, is it not curious that 
they followed, not the appeal of a more secure and pros- 
perous life, but rather the promise of world domination? 
How recurrent is this theme in German history! Was 
Nazism a coincidence or the fulfillment of age-old German 
dreams, philosophically and systematically inculcated into 
German consciousness for centuries? 

The peoples of the world now instinctively sense the 
answer. Though they have not traced down in laborious 
research the course of German history and its abnormal 
mission for conquering the world, their attitude towards 
the German people has changed. Common sense, which 
is the ordinary man's erudition, informs him that no 
people can be innocent who have twice in one generation 
burst forth in aggression against all their neighbors, near 
and far. How is it that one spot on the surface of the 
earth, no larger than Texas, should so persistently explode 
and ravage the world? 

And what were the toasts, the slogans, the anthems, 
the battle cries of this people? "Der Tag" when Germany 
will rule the world. "Deutschland uber Alles". "Tomor- 
row we will rule the world." "The destiny of Germany is 
to rule the world." Rule the world! Rule the world! No 
people who can thrill to such a mission are innocent vic- 
tims of wicked leaders. 

At the beginning of the second World War, the leaders 
of the democracies still spoke with extereme caution about 
"the German people." But as German ruthlessness as- 
serted itself, important statesmen began to express their 
belief in the responsibility of the German people. 


Not for the purpose of mere indictment, but with the 
view of isolating the germ, the better to prescribe the 
remedy, let us examine the historical background of Ger- 
man chauvinism. Nazism is no new theory born out of the 
inequities of the Versailles Treaty, or because of economic 
distress. It is an expression of German aspirations voiced 
through the centuries. 

Caesar and Tacitus Report on Nazism 

The Germans in defeat, even in Caesar's day as he re- 
ported, had reason to fear the "general hatred of the 
Germans" and to resort to the distinction between the 
people and their leaders. 

Caesar wrote : "Their whole life is composed of hunting 
expeditions and military pursuits; from early boyhood 
they are zealous for toil and hardship. Those who remain 
longest in chastity win greatest praise among their kin- 
dred; some think that stature, some that strength and 
sinew are fortified thereby. Further they deem it a most 
disgraceful thing to have had knowledge of a woman before 
the twentieth year." 

Psychiatrists will find in this observation fruitful 
material for their studies of the root causes of German 
sadism and of the inferiority complex which seeks to ex- 
press itself through conquest and domination. The well- 
known tendencies in Germany towards homosexuality 
became public knowledge when Hitler justified his 
purge of Roehm and his adherents on the ground that 
they had been guilty of practices of degradation which 
corrupted the governing circles. Hitler's and Hess' own 
"aestheticism," Goering's abnormal practices (as deter- 
mined by a Swiss court), and the evil conduct of the 
Streichers and other Nazi leaders, fit well into the charac- 
teristic pattern of bestiality. The study of psychotic be- 


havior is still in the exploratory stages, but Caesar's report 
on the training begun ages ago by the German people to 
deny and invert normal instincts as part of the tribal 
custom may be a significant clue to sick German conduct. 
Is it possible that German cruelty and blood lust is 
traceable to sexual inhibitions? Is there significance in 
the pornographic tendencies of the Germans fed by such 
official documents as Streicher's Stuermerf These and 
similar questions we leave to the reflection of experts in 
a domain of medicine still elusive and challenging. 

More certain is the conclusion that the Germans made 
these sacrifices to gain strength and stature for "military 

Caesar, who as a dictator had no high ethical standards, 
was reporting rather than moralizing when he continued 
with these observations: 

"For agriculture they have no zeal, and the greater 
part of their food consists of milk, cheese and flesh. No 
man has a definite quantity of land or estate of his own; 
the magistrates and chiefs every year assign to tribes and 
clans that have assembled together as much land and in 
such place as seems good to them, and compel the tenants 
after a year to pass on elsewhere. They adduce many 
reasons for that practice the fear that they may be 
tempted by continuous association to substitute agricul- 
ture for their warrior zeal; . . . Their states account it 
the highest praise by devastating their borders to have 
areas of wilderness as wide as possible around them. They 
think it the true sign of valor when the neighbors are 
driven to retire from their lands and no man dares to 
settle near, and at the same time they believe they will 
be safer thereby, having removed all fear of a sudden 
inroad. . . . Acts of brigandage committed outside the 
borders of each several state involve no disgrace ; in fact, 


they affirm that such are committed in order to practice 
the young men and to diminish sloth. And when any of 
the chiefs has said in public assembly that he will be 
leader, 'Let those who will follow declare it', then all who 
approve the cause and the man rise together to his service 
and promise their own assistance, and win the general 
praise of the people. Any of them who have not followed, 
after promise, are reckoned as deserters and traitors." 

Caesar's keen reporting is confirmed by centuries of 
experience. We shall see how the Germans' fear of agri- 
culture lest it diminish "their warrior zeal" affected their 
national development. Of course, the program of "dev- 
astating their borders" and committing "acts of brigand- 
age" has remained a constant aspiration of the Germans. 
Most striking is the selection of a leader, the oath to fol- 
low him blindly, and the ritual of obedience. All who dis- 
agree are traitors. Is not this self-appointed, self- 
annointed leadership and blind fealty a description of 
Hitlerism? It is to precisely this tradition in German 
history that the Nazi leaders have appealed. 

Always in German history the inverted pyramid has 
been the governing form. All authority rests on the apex. 
In primitive days the leader was the foremost warrior or 
huntsman. Often his son or grandson succeeded him. 
Later he was designated King or Duke, but at all times the 
people swore solemn loyalty and offered sacrifices to him 
under their ancient oaks. All independent thought was 
surrendered. The leader's word was final, even if it re- 
quired treachery and dishonesty. The common denomina- 
tor of all leaders was that they were warriors. Political 
rule was based upon the ability to wage war. Perhaps it 
was not extraordinary in the dark age of Caesar, but its 
persistence, unchanged through the many centuries, is a 


meaningful phenomenon. Five hundred years after the 
revolt in Athens, and after social revolution had sent its 
civilizing streams through the Mediterranean, the Ger- 
mans were still blindly following their leaders. 

About a century later, Tacitus, in his famous De 
Germania took sight again of German tendencies. Had 
they changed? He writes: "Without being armed they 
transact nothing, whether of public or private concern- 
ment. The Princes fight for victory; for the Prince his 
followers fight. Many of the young nobility, when their 
own community comes to languish in its vigor by long 
peace and inactivity, betake themselves through impatience 
to other states which then prove to be in war. In addition 
to the fact that this people cannot brook repose, and that by 
perilous adventures they more quickly blazon their fame, 
they require violence and war to support their huge train 
of retainers. They demand and enjoy their war-horses and 
victorious javelins dyed in the blood of their enemies. In 
the place of pay, they are supplied with a daily table and 
repasts; though grossly prepared, yet very profuse. For 
maintaining such liberality and munificence, a fund is fur- 
nished by continual wars and plunder. Nor can you as 
easily persuade them to cultivate the ground, or to await 
the return of the seasons and produce of the year, as to 
provoke the foe and risk wounds and death; since they 
account it stupid and spiritless to acquire by their sweat 
what they can gain by their blood." 

The cause of such consistent conduct is less significant 
than the effect. They still transact nothing without being 
armed. They still consider it stupid to acquire by their 
sweat what they can gain by their blood. They still seek 
wealth from plunder. Arid though the javelin dyed in the 
blood of their enemies is outmoded, symbolically they stil] 
"demand and enjoy it." 


The military staffs of the United Nations, astonished 
by the daring gambles taken by German generals, may 
gain some understanding from Tacitus' humorous observa- 
tion : "What is marvellous, playing at dice is one of their 
most serious employments ; and even sober, they are game- 
sters ; nay, so desperately do they venture upon the chance 
of winning or losing, that when their whole substance is 
played away, they stake their liberty and their persons 
upon one and the last throw." 

The. Blitzkrieg, despite its meticulous, detailed plan- 
ning, is an all or nothing strategy. Lines of communica- 
tion are disregarded for the infiltrating tanks which dash 
to the enemy's rear. Either disorganization and terror 
result, or the gamble is lost. That is why the word "time- 
table" became the key word in Nazi tactics. And that is 
why the United Nations recognized the inestimable value 
of delay. It not only afforded opportunity for preparation, 
but it upset the schedule of winning all in one blow, and 
therefore made possible losing all in many blows. Goebbels 
unwittingly echoed Tacitus when he said "We will either 
conquer the world or if we have to go out, we will slam 
the door so hard the universe will collapse." Also, this 
gambler's instinct nourishes complete ruthlessness. If the 
alternative is nothing, what is to be gained by observing 
the rules of international law or the dictates of common 
humanity? The desperate gambler who contemplates 
suicide as the end of misfortune need not concern himself 
with the players' opinion of his honesty or sportsmanship. 
How true it is that the Germans staked their "liberty and 
their persons upon one and the last throw!" They were 
willing to sacrifice their freedom in advance so that they 
could win the game of world conquest. Truculently they 
strode across Europe, enjoying their temporary triumphs 
in the illusion that they were to be the master race for 


"one thousand years to come." Losing has never deterred 
them from playing the hideous game of war. They are 
inveterate gamblers. 

The Germans crushed Latin civilization at the battle 
of Adrianople in 378. Almost sixteen hundred years later 
they overran France. History, too, is global, and the 
endless treading of man often finds him in the same 
spot. Caesar's description of the Gauls (French) after 
their defeat by the Germans is a glove-fitting commentary 
upon Vichy. He writes: "Now there was a time in the 
past when the Gauls were superior in valor to the Ger- 
mans and made aggressive war upon them, and because of 
the number of their people and the lack of land they sent 
colonies across the Rhine. . . . Little by little the Gauls 
have grown accustomed to defeat, and after being con- 
quered in many battles they do not even compare them- 
selves in point of valor with the Germans." 

Here is the tragedy of France, from the soft and lux- 
urious life before battle to the fawning obeisance after 

The Teuton invaders made war their occupation. 
Wherever they tread, culture withered and died. They 
sacked Paris, Arras, Eheims, Amiens, Tours, Bordeaux 
and dozens of other cities which have been visited by their 
descendant criminals repeatedly in later generations. The 
very word "vandalism" was coined to describe German 
savagery, and the word "war" stems from the Old High 
German "werra" to embroil, to confuse. 

Earlier German Fuehrers 

Four centuries after Adrianople, Charlemagne con- 
tinued the German tradition. 

Other leaders had waged war because "from their youth 
up war is their passion." Plunder and the gratification 

of conquest were the driving force. But Charlemagne de- 
creed an objective. It was not modest. He sought to 
conquer the world, a refrain which has since run through 
German existence with maddening and devastating per- 
sistence. He fought a war every year. His brilliant gifts 
were devoted to annihilating his neighbors and robbing 
them of their possessions. Germans followed him with 
fanatical devotion for the same principles which inspired 
them to follow the Kaiser and Hitler in our generation. 

In the twelfth century the leader was different but 
the program was monotonously the same. Then it was 
Frederick Barbarossa who scorned peace. The sole ques- 
tion was whether the Italians or Slavs should be sub- 
jugated. He chose the Slavs and waged war upon them 
with frightful brutality. After victory, he forbade the use 
of native Slav languages and passed severe regulations 
against the Jews. Hitler canot lay claim to originality. 
The consistent antecedents in German history establish 
him as merely the latest of a long line of German bar- 

Through the fourteenth century German infamy con- 
tinued to assert itself. Froissart, the foremost historian 
of his time, writes: "The Germans are covetous people 
above all others. They have no pity if they have the upper 
hand, and they are hard and cruel with their prisoners." 
The doctrine of world conquest began to take on organ- 
izational developments. The Hanseatic League organized 
Germans in all other countries on the theory that their 
loyalty was still due their German leader. The Auslands 
Deutsche fifth-column activities of Hitler's regime are 
merely an extended copy of an old German device. Once 
more we find that the evils of the Nazis are not unique 
constructions of a new movement but the persistent repeti- 
tion of German behavior for centuries. 


The temperature readings by historians, no matter of 
what century, reveal always the same war fever. More 
than four hundred years ago Machiavelli reports : "German 
towns are at little or no expense in anything, but in laying 
up military stores and making good their fortifications 
... on holidays instead of other diversion, the Germans 
are taught the use of weapons." 

During the Thirty Years War of the seventeenth cen- 
tury, the Germans were torn by internal feuds of petty 
dynasties and quarreling princes. Their brutality in war 
was undiminished. They overran Bohemia and persecuted 
the Czech people with a ferocity exceeded only by the Nazi 
legions. Thousands of hostages were shot. Torture and 
terror walked hand in hand the ubiquitous companions 
of the German program. The sack of Magdeburg con- 
stitutes one of the most barbaric and inhuman incidents in 
the history of man. Some thirty thousand innocent people 
were deliberately butchered. The Germans succeeded in 
surpassing this atrocity by more recent efforts in Rotter- 
dam and in Poland. 

Fuehrers to express German war lust were never lack- 
ing: Frederick Wilhelm, the Great Elector, who laid the 
foundations of Prussian military despotism; the Soldier 
King (father of Frederick the Great) described as one of 
the "nastiest bullies who ever lived"; and then the pride 
of all Germans, Frederick the Great. He harnessed his 
gifts to avowed treachery and unscrupulousness. He once 
said : "He is a fool, and that nation is a fool, who, having 
the power to strike his enemy unawares, does not strike 
and strike his deadliest." Frederick the Great destroyed 
whatever freedom existed among his own followers and 
moulded Prussia into a military autocracy whose sole aim 
was war and conquest. Among his depredations was the 
ravaging and partitioning of Poland in concert with an- 
other Prussian, Catherine the Great of Russia. 


Other nations have been guilty of territorial ag- 
grandizement. England's imperialism built an empire. 
Even the United States has isolated chapters in its history 
of attacking the weak to aggrandize its borders. But 
brutality and terrorization were not deliberate methods 
sadistically enjoyed. Much more important, the processes 
of civilization were never rejected as decadent and weak. 
Dominion status, self-determination, the recognition of in- 
dividual freedoms, took their places on the agenda of poli- 
tical evolution. England is still the birthplace of the Magna 
Carta. The United States voted freedom for the Filipinos 
and gave a unique demonstration of international altruism 
at the end of the last war. In these nations minorities' 
rights are shielded and intolerance is a mob expression, 
not a governmental policy. The Statue of Liberty and not 
the "mailed fist" is the symbol which appeals to the masses. 
Demagogues, even in times of economic distress, achieve 
only limited popularity and sooner or later the healthy 
common sense of the people rejects them and they disap- 
pear from the public scene. No one would now succeed 
politically who offered a program of future wars or who 
sought to appeal to the lust for conquest by pointing out 
what easy prey undefended South America would be. The 
Good Neighbor policy is found to be a vote-catching slogan. 
Can anyone, in the light of German history, conceive this 
to be similarly true of the German people? 

Gangsterism in Intellectual Garb 

While state and religion are separated in the democ- 
racies, there is a unity of Christian ethics. The virtues of 
kindness, honesty, loyalty and peace are universally ac- 
cepted. In few countries could militarism be adopted as 
a state creed as it was in Germany, without immediately 
disastrous consequences to the government. There are in 


dividual Christian martyrs in Germany, but the people do 
not express their revulsion. If the destruction of religion 
is essential to the program of world conquest, then even 
religion, the profoundest of human emotions, is yielded up 
by great masses of Germans as a willing sacrifice. We can 
weigh right and wrong only in scales of an accepted stand- 
ard. But weights are meaningless where the standards are 
reversed and we encounter a double set of morals. In the 
Nazi and Fascist world, where lying is a virtue as well as a 
practical weapon ; where treachery and treaty-breaking are 
admirable devices for national achievement; where im- 
morality is required in the interest of building a populous 
soldier state; where mercy and kindness are despicable 
weaknesses; where science is evil if it searches for truth 
and scholarly if it aids the theories of party heads ; where 
education is a dangerous development in men who should 
blindly obey their rulers in ignorance; where death on the 
battlefield is the highest achievement and hope of man ; in 
such a world of curved distorted mirrors, what purpose is 
there in pointing out a speck of dust which obscures a 
clearer view? 

The Germans have developed a philosophy which makes 
a religion of war and a cult of mass murder. They con- 
sider it their mission to subjugate all other peoples to 
slavery. They exclude the doctrines of the sacredness of 
human life and liberty and substitute for it the ideal 
of war. The unique phenomenon of Germanism is that 
its conspiracy against world peace is not mere gangster- 
ism or nihilism. It is an intellectual movement, if you 
please. It is supported by a philosophy carefully devised, 
nurtured and inculcated into every citizen. This philosophy 
has been developed by some of its most brilliant minds 
and appears in the most profoundly written treatises. The 
great error which still persists among the democracies 


is that Nazism is the expression of the dregs of German 
life. Unfortunately, this is not true. It is the actual 
execution of a program prescribed by German intellec- 
tuals. This cannot be denied for it is the confession of 
Germans themselves, set forth in the permanence of in- 
numerable tracts, books and articles. Every German is 
familiar with them and was long before Hitler was born. 

There could be, and was, anti-Semitism in other coun- 
tries. It was the expression of ignorance and dark 
prejudice. The illiterate mujik of Russia was the typical 
example. But only in Germany could there be cultural 
anti-Semitism. Only in Germany could a great artist 
like Wagner immerse his talent in blood lust and supply 
an emotional incitation to German mass murder. The 
significance lies not in some particular theory, but in the 
association of cultural and intellectual thinking in Ger- 
many with mob standards. Lynching is thus raised to the 
level of national policy. It is then deified as a world 
mission and becomes an international program. The 
lowest common denominator of mob brutality is elevated 
to a national ideal. Gangsterism puts on a uniform and 
becomes patriotism. Racism goes to school and becomes 
Weltanschauung. Unscrupulousness is clothed with phil- 
osophy and becomes destiny. The whole admixture 
becomes a cult for war. The end justifies the meanness. 

Of course it was incomprehensible to the western world 
that such corruption could be the accepted diet of an 
apparently intelligent people. That is why the democracies 
misconceived the true nature and meaning of Nazism. 
They regarded it as a temporary evil, a passing phase in a 
people captured by a gangster clique. 

One still has a burning recollection of a newsreel scene 
showing Chamberlain descending from a plane just re- 
turned from Berchtesgarden and triumphantly waving a 

rectangular piece of paper upon which was written Hitler's 
personal promise to make no further aggressions. The 
trusting people strewed flowers in his path and in front 
of Daladier, too. But written in Hitler's book and in 
dozens of German political works was the express state- 
ment that promises may be broken by Germans whenever 
it served the national interest. Deceit and treachery are 
acknowledged national policies. 

Actually, as we shall see, Nazism is but another name 
for Pan-Germanism which was projected by the aristo- 
cratic Junkers. The philosophy and drive were the same 
and received the same fanatical devotion from the German 
people. In the Kaiser's day Germany was prosperous. 
It was determined to carry out its program of war. 
"Germany," said the Kaiser, "like the spirit of Imperial 
Rome, must expand and impose itself." In Hitler's day 
Germany was poor. The program was the same. Rich 
or poor, aristocrat or upstart, intellectual or ignoramus, 
these people consider they have a mission of conquest. 
Leaders are always available. Those who appeal to this 
basest instinct of the German people are instantly assured 
the most devoted following. The western world is well 
aware of its inability to fathom the psychology of the 
Japanese.* But in our very recognition that we do not 
understand, there is some protection. The Germans, too, 
have an unfathomable national psychology and paganism. 
But they deceive us because in all other respects they 
are Westerners and because we apply the standards to them 
that we adhere to. Thus, we are not even alert to the 
danger they represent. Indeed, to this day we are divided 

*We have never fully understood their regard for their emperor as 
the actual descendant of the Sun God, the ritual of hara-kiri, its com- 
mon practice because of loss of face (the chauffeur who drives the 
emperor and is delayed by a flat tire commits hara-kiri at the end of 
the journey), the lack of regard for life in the East, and all its strange 


as to their real intentions. It is difficult to believe thai 
wrong is deliberately preached as right; that our virtues 
are scorned by them as stupidity and weakness; and that 
their vices are brazenly announced as national policy and 
part of their divine mission. Yes, theirs is a German 
conspiracy against world peace and against every free 
man in any country. It is a conspiracy which has never 
died with defeat. It is ingrained in the people and sus- 
tains them in every dark period until Der Tag. Inter- 
vals of enforced peace are but the opportunity to prepare 
for a more horrendous attack, so overwhelming and brutal 
that finally it will succeed and the world will be ruled 
by Germans as masters who have fulfilled their destiny. 
Lest this be deemed mere opinion, the most persuasive 
evidence to establish the facts is available. It exists in 
the writings of Germans who have become the philosoph- 
ical heroes of the German people. 

Race and Murder Become A Philosophy 

Hegel, a follower of the noted German philosopher, 
Fichte, was among the first to give German aberration 
an intellectual base. He was a dreary teacher at Heidel- 
berg, but he achieved national popularity when his book 
Philosophy of History propounded the theory that human- 
ity had finally come to manhood in the Germanic race. 
This Weltanschauung was transmitted to whole genera- 
tions of young Germans. The Pan-German League was 
formed in 1894 with the specific program of world con- 
quest. Its motto was the Great Elector's declaration: 
"Remember you are a German!" The inevitable implica- 
tion was every German's duty to join in the movement to 
enslave the rest of mankind. 

Then followed another German professor, Heinrich 
von Treitschke, who has since been elevated by Germans 


as the foremost philosopher of their program. He inter 
preted Germanism as anti-Christianity. He brazenly 
taught the doctrine of "might makes right." He en- 
thralled the German people with his theory of the Ger- 
man super-state, which would rule the universe. He 
asserted that there were no individual rights and that 
every person existed only for the State. Its will was the 
only legitimate force and war was the best way in which 
to assert it. He denied the sacredness of human life and 
declared war was sublime because it ennobled man to "mur- 
der without passion." 

Treitschke became a popular hero in his day. It is 
significant that he also captured the intellectuals. His 
teachings were echoed in universities by avid disciples. 
Education and culture consisted of such indoctrination. 
Hitler, too, received support from German intellectuals, 
who wrote volumes confirming the theory of Aryanism 
and racial superiority. In weighing the responsibility of 
the German people, it is peculiarly condemnatory that not 
only their masses but the erudite among them shared the 
same dream of world conquest. 

Treitschke did not content himself with abstractions. 
He gave specifications. "Germany must make it a duty 
to employ traitors in the enemy state for its own inter- 
ests." He declared that "every good German subject is a 
latent, and when opportunity arises, an active, spy." As 
for treaties, "they can and must be denounced by Ger- 
many whenever the promise they hold becomes unprofit- 
able to her." He denied the existence of international law 
and order, or the validity of any covenants among nations. 
He concluded that other nations constituted "a foreign 
world, which cannot be reformed, but can only be over- 

That this was not irresponsible ranting is established 
by the fact that the Pan-German League officially adopted 


this program. By 1900 the League had fifty foreign asso- 
ciations, all committed to the preparation for the eventual 
holocaust. Thus there were planted in foreign nations, 
organizations which could carry out the sinister designs 
of Professor Treitschke which were adopted as State 
policy. What was later to become known as the fifth 
column was in existence long before the first World War. 

The intellectual preparation for German dynamism 
gathered momentum. In 1887 Nietzsche in his Geneoloyy 
of Morals wrote: "When the instincts of a society ulti- 
mately make it give up war and conquest, it is decadent; 
it is ripe for democracy and the rule of shop-keepers . . ." 

The aggressions of the Germans differ from those of 
other peoples not only in their philosophical motivation 
but in the artificial creation of a Master Race theory. 
Count Arthur de Gobineau was the first modern writer 
to propound the supremacy of Aryans. In his books, The 
Inequality of Human Races and Moral and Intellectual 
Diversity of Races, written in the nineteenth century, he 
served to an eager German public pseudo-scientific trash 
which they gobbled up. He contended that the strength of 
a people depended upon the amount of Aryan blood which 
it had preserved. His biology was as atrocious as his his- 
tory but Germans disregarded all errors. He accepted 
the Biblical divisions of men into three peoples: the sons 
of Ham, Shem and Japheth. The first, he contended, was 
absorbed by the African Negroes; the second "died out" 
through racial intermixtures; while the third developed 
into three branches. One branch settled in Persia and 
became "Iranian Aryans", the second became the Greeks 
and Romans, and the third and noblest of them all became 
the "Germanic Aryans". Thus he forgot completely about 
the yellow race ! The Aryans' first appearance in history, 
wrote de Gobineau, began with the conquest of Babylon 

by the Medes. They defeated the Hamites and the Semites, 
and demonstrated immediately that the word "Aryan" 
meant "honorable" and that an Aryan had superior in- 
telligence and strength. 

The fatuous notions of de Gobineau would not be 
worth mention, were it not for the fact that they form the 
basic racial ideology of the Germans, which Hitler simply 
lifted and put into his book. He did not even contribute 
the refinements of interpretation or development. This, 
too, was done by predecessors. Houston Stewart Cham- 
berlain, the son-in-law of Richard Wagner, translated 
de Gobineau's theorizing into a semi-political program. 
In his book, Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, he 
reduced the vast complexity of human history to the 
equation of race qualities. There were only "Teutonic" 
and "anti-Teutonic" peoples. He "proved" that the Ger- 
man or "Teuton" was the dominant factor in the growth 
of civilization. The physical characteristics of the Teuton 
were set forth. He was tall, fair and somewhat "carroty" 
(the exact opposite of the leading Nazis who used this 
ideology and adopted it as their own). 

The Nazis found this racial theory so ingrained in 
German consciousness that it made the surest demagogic 
appeal. It was constantly exploited for purposes of 
rabble-rousing and gave "philosophical justification" to 
anti-Semitism. Alfred Rosenberg, "the race expert" of 
the Nazi regime, has acknowledged the source of the Nazi 
race doctrine. "It has been a truism for a long while," 
he wrote, "that all the Western States and their creative 
values have been produced by the Germans. Houston 
Stewart Chamberlain was the first one who drew the 
necessary conclusions from this fact: 'if German blood 
were to disappear from Europe . . . the entire culture 
of the West would go with it . . .' Today we are con- 


scions that we stand before a final decision of terrible 
significance. Either we rise to an ennobled achievement 
by a revival and purification of the ancient blood, thus 
renewing our will to fight, or the very last Germanic West- 
ern values of civilization and state discipline will be sub- 
merged in the polluted human masses of the cities of the 
world . . ." 

We have seen the rantings of Treitschke and Nietzsche, 
deemed innocuous theorizing by other nations, translated 
into the two greatest blood-sheddings in history. The race 
theory made its contribution to the mission of world con- 
quest. Considered unscientific blabbering by learned men 
in other nations, we have seen it applied first internally in 
Germany and then by brutal war in an effort to give it 
universal reality. The earliest Nazi declaration of racial 
policy came in February, 1920, thirteen years before 
Hitler's ascension to the Chancellory. The National So- 
cialist Party proposed that none but those of German blood 
should be citizens of the Nation. All others were to be 
"guests" until they emigrated. On April 7, 1933, the Nazi 
Reichstag enacted a statute providing that "officials who 
are of non-Aryan descent are to be retired." These provi- 
sions were, a short time later, made to apply to professions 
and universities. In May, 1935, the new Conscription Law 
provided that only "Aryans" were to be permitted in active 
military service. It was decreed that a non- Aryan is one 
who is descended from non-Aryan, particularly Jewish, 
parents or grand-parents. It sufficed if one parent or one 
grandparent was non-Aryan. The search for Jewish blood 
was to be extended back to January 1, 1800, and a "racial 
expert" was appointed to delve into the obscure pedigrees 
of doubtful "Aryans" and answer all questions of hered- 
ity. On September 15, 1935 the Party Congress at Nurem- 
berg adopted decrees which limited citizenship to those "of 


German or cognate blood" and who also conform to the 
National Socialistic conception of loyalty to the State. 

These decrees have not even the virtue of misguided 
sincerity. For while the Germans adopted the racial 
theory of de Gobineau and Houston Stewart Chamberlain, 
they deliberately ignored certain conclusions of these very 
authors which did not suit their sinister plans. Thus, de 
Gobineau, while he extolled the superiority of the Aryan, 
concluded that, by virtue of contamination with "inferior 
races", there no longer was such a thing as a pure Aryan. 
He declared pessimistically that the Aryan mission was 
therefore at an end and could never be restored. But 
Rosenberg, who, we have seen, is a devoted disciple of de 
Gobineau, nevertheless writes in his My thus: "Today 
there is rising a new belief, the myth of blood; the belief 
that through blood the divine being of man is to be de- 
fended ; the belief enshrined in the clearest knowledge that 
Nordic blood represents the mystery which has overcome 
and replaced the old sacraments." And Dr. Wilhelm Kus- 
serow, a noted German author, as Vice-President of the 
Nordic Faith Movement, prepared the Nordic Confession 
of Faith which states: "We believe in the immortality 
of Nordic man, in the inheritance of his kind, and in the 
everlasting Nordic Soul as power of the divine on earth 
and in the universe." Lest this be too abstruse, the explicit 
statement is made: "Nordic man has a divine mission on 
earth and he will exist as long as the world lasts." 

Also de Gobineau paid grudging tribute to the real 
achievements of the Jews and even admitted that the Negro 
"element" had contributed to the development of the arts. 
Though he disliked the Jews, he wrote, "The Jew is no 
enemy of Teutonic civilization and culture." 

Such is the mental dishonesty of the Nazis that they 
suppressed these tenets of their own idolized prophets. 


Anything that did not aid in moulding a war spirit must 
be sidetracked. Nor is this tendency to distort text at- 
tributable solely to the ignorant. Once more we find the 
intellectual circles, the professors of German universities, 
lending themselves to such methods. For example, the 
theories of Chamberlain gave rise to a whole series of 
interpretative and expanded works by learned men. Yet 
they, too, chose to ignore Chamberlain's broad definition 
of "Teutons" as including the English, Celts and the 
Scandinavians. Indeed, he even considered the French 
Teutonic because they were a people of Northern Europe, 
and he called the Russians "at least half Teutonic." By 
such broad inclusion Chamberlain diluted his own un- 
scientific conclusions to meaninglessness. It is significant 
that the Nazis' own Nuremberg laws abandoned the word 
"Aryan" and substituted for it "German." Also "Jew" 
was used instead of non-Aryan. It was provided that a 
"Jew" was forbidden to marry a "German." "Jewish" 
households were forbidden to hire "German" servant girls. 
Chamberlain's thesis included doctrines which would land 
him posthaste in a concentration camp if he were alive to 
tread the soil whose "race" benefactor he was. For he 
contended that the Magna Carta of 1215 was a development 
of German ideas. "Whoever," he wrote, "runs counter to 
this [liberty of Magna Carta] is a criminal even if he 
wear a crown." But de Gobineau and Chamberlain re- 
mained the apostles of the German racial theories even in 
their frantic efforts to prove that Jesus was not a Jew. 

Once more we find that Mein Kampf is no original 
work. It reveals itself as a puerile anthology of theories 
absorbed and accepted by Germans before Hitler was born. 
The race theories in Mein Kampf are mere paraphrases 
of de Gobineau and Chamberlain. It states : "Human cul- 
ture and civilization on this earth are inseparably bound 


np with the existence of the Aryan. By his extinction or 
decline the dark veils of an uncultured age will descend 
once more." Also, "The Aryan Man alone is the founder 
of a higher humanity itself and consequently represents 
. . . the Prometheus of mankind ... It is the duty of the 
national State to see to it that a history of the world is 
eventually written in which the question of race occupies 
the most prominent position." 

The history thus to be written was to conform with 
Chamberlain's political thesis, which surprisingly emerged 
from an abstract "scientific" work, namely, that it is "the 
most sacred duty of the Teutons ... to serve the Teutonic 
cause . . . and seek not only to extend our empire farther 
and farther over the surface of the globe and over the 
power of nature, but above all unconditionally to subject 
the inner world to ourselves by mercilessly overthrowing 
and excluding those who are alien. ..." 

The theme of world conquest and race supremacy runs 
through the symphony of German hate and war plotting 
as a persistent, repeated motif growing ever louder and 
more maddening, until it reaches its furious climax. Then 
blood flows all over Europe and other continents. Mil- 
lions of German soldiers are once more on the march to 
kill, ravage, and commit unmentionable atrocities so that 
Deutschland may be tiber alles. The philosophical horns 
contributing to the crescendo are many. Moeller Van 
der Bruck, in Germany's Third Empire, writes: "We are 
not thinking of the Europe of today, which is too con- 
temptible to have any value. We are thinking of the 
Europe of yesterday and whatever thereof may be sal- 
vaged for tomorrow. We are thinking of the Germany 
of all time, the Germany of a two-thousand years past, 
the Germany of eternal present which dwells in the spirit 
but must be secured in reality and can only so be politically 


secured. The ape and tiger in man are threatening. The 
shadow of Africa falls across Europe. It is our task to 
be guardians on the threshold of values." And Oswald 
Spengler, in Man and Technics, writes that man is a car- 
nivorous animal : "That to such beasts as we, eternal peace 
would be like intolerable boredom (taedium vitae) of Im- 
perial Rome, and that pacifism is a silly dream." 

Treitschke explains in Die Politik that since Ger- 
many will never be able to understand the world, she 
must conquer the world and reform it so that it will be 
able to conform to German thought. Muller, Novalis, 
Fichte, Johann Josef Gorres, all play the same tune. 
The German people avidly listen to this martial music. 
It stirs their emotions. They are hypnotized by it 
frenzy and they follow it with brutal boots. The theme 
is recurrent through the ages of German development. 
They are familiar with it, and the leader of the day is not 
the inciting cause of their reactions. It is the tom-tom 
which calls them and to which they devote their lives 
finally on the battlefield. 

These facts have not been generally accepted in the 
past because it appeared incredible that an apparently 
civilized people should be in a constant state of agitation 
for war. 

Charles Francis Adams, the noted American historian, 
emerged from the same state of incredulity, a chastened 
man. He wrote: "Suspecting in my own case (that I 
did not think like a German) I have of late confined my 
reading on this topic almost exclusively to German 
sources. I have been taking a course on Metzsche and 
Treitschke, as also in the German Denkschrift, illumined 
by excerpts from the German papers in this country and 
the official utterances of Chancellor von Bethmann- 
Hollweg. The result has been most disastrous. It has 

utterly destroyed my capacity for judicial consideration. 
I can only say that if what I find in those sources is a 
capacity to think Germanically, I would rather cease 
thinking at all. It is the absolute negation of everything 
which in the past tended to the elevation of mankind, 
and the installation in place thereof, of a system of thor- 
ough dishonesty, emphasized by brutal stupidity. There 
is a low cunning about it, too, which is to me in the last 
degree repulsive." 

Paganism Adopts Music 

The war lust of the German people is composed not 
only of a philosophy for conquest, but of a race theory to 
justify it. There is an additional ingredient, one that 
applies a mystical religious quality and transforms the 
political movement into a fanatical pagan rite. Richard 
Wagner did not invent this ingredient. It existed in the 
folklore of the German people for many centuries. But 
he gave it palatable and popular form in brilliant music 
and story. To the rest of the world Wagner's operas were 
merely artistic fantasy. To the Germans they were real- 
ity, even if only unconscious. 

Hitler has acknowledged his indebtedness to Wagner. 
In Mein Kampf, he writes: "At the age of twelve I saw 
the first opera of my life, Wagner's Lohengrin. I was 
captivated at once. My youthful enthusiasm for the 
master of Bayreuth knew no bounds. Again and again I 
was drawn to his works. . ." 

Opera is a popular tradition in Germany, and there is 
an opera house in almost every German town. What were 
these Germans attracted to? The pure art of Wagner's 
genius, or the inspirational metapolitik of his legends? 

The Ring is composed of three musical dramas and a 
prologue. Wagner labored more than a quarter of a 


century on this work. It contains all the mystical, pagan 
elements of German antiquity which have been eagerly 
accepted by the German people as the destiny they must 
fulfill. Wotan is the typical Fuehrer. As the chief of 
ancient Germanic gods, he makes his own law and is all 
powerful. He strives constantly to increase his power. 
Wotan deliberately disregards his pacts. He is depicted 
as breaking his treaty with the giants, Fasolt and Fafner. 
He depends on his cunning Chancellor, Loki, to relieve 
him of his difficulties. Goebbels may well imagine him- 
self the Loki to Hitler's Wotan. When Wotan must have 
money, he obtains it by force. He captures the ruler of the 
Mebelings and squeezes money from him as ransom. The 
Jews have been cast in this role by the Nazis. 

When Wotan must recapture the gold ring of all power, 
he calls upon the most perfect of all heroes, his own grand- 
son, Siegfried. Siegfried kills the dragon, but is later 
killed by Hagen, a lust child, after which comes the twi- 
light of the gods. Wagner conceived Siegfried as a grand- 
son of a god, even though he was a man. German tendency 
to interchange gods and men is a basic characteristic. 
Kauschning reports Hitler saying to him : "Man has to be 
passed and surpassed. Nietzsche did, it is true, realize 
something of this, in his way. He went so far as to 
recognize the superman as a new biological variety. But 
he was not too sure of it. Man is becoming God that is 
the simple fact. Man is God in the making." Spoken by 
someone with ethical concepts, this might be deemed a 
noble symbolism. Spoken by a German with a "mission", 
it has all of the ominous mysticism which drives this 
people to kill. Words take on significance from their ut- 
terers. Your dearest friend or a notorious gangster may 
insist that "you take a ride." A pleasant trip or im- 
minent death lurks behind the words. Psychologically, 


the indiscriminate association by the Germans of them- 
selves with gods is the creation of cult above law and 
decency. By creating another plane of power, they shed 
the last vestiges of conscience and civilization which 
might restrain them. Shielded by the darkness of mystic- 
ism they plunder and kill with fewer inhibitions. And 
their claim to race superiority affords them the pretense 
that they are benefiting rather than destroying civilization. 

Another Wagnerian concept is the stab in the back, 
which finally defeats the Hero. Germany, according to 
this symbol, can never be conquered on the battlefield. 
But some explanation for its repeated defeats must be 
offered, and Wagner has constructed a classic one. Why, 
she is stabbed in the back! Of course by ever present 
Hagens, who are usually designated as Jews the lust- 
child symbol being intended to designate impurity of 
blood. Not only Hitler, but the generals and the masses 
of German people insist that they won the first World 
War on the battlefields, only to be "stabbed in the back" 
at home. German acceptance of this alibi reconciled for 
them their belief in the superiority of the German race 
with the humiliating defeat they had nevertheless sus- 
tained. These are no mere psychological reflections. They 
are the stuff of which a third and fourth World War will 
be made by the Germans, if we do not really understand 
them and this time take adequate preventive steps. 

Wagner's romanticism has been swallowed in whole 
draughts by the German people. Hitler, who despised the 
common people but was sensitive to their susceptibilities, 
included Wagnerism in his patched-up program. He plagi- 
arized from Wagner the "heil" of the salute, the National 
Socialist battle slogan, "German Awake!" and called the 
western line of forts, the Siegfried Line. In Mein Kampf, 
he writes about the Nazi party that "out of its flames was 


bound to come the sword which was to regain the freedom 
of the German Siegfried." 

German war lust is thus based not only on the spurious 
profundity of war philosophy, and racial superiority, but 
upon the revival of pagan epics. What was at first a 
base combative instinct flourished through philosophical, 
scientific and then mystical stages into a full flowered re- 
ligious-political program of world conquest. Nietzsche 
wrote the new German Biblical creed : "Ye have heard how 
in old times it was said, Blessed are the meek, for they 
shall inherit the earth, but I say unto you, Blessed are 
the valiant, for they shall make the earth their throne. 
And ye have heard man say, Blessed are the poor in spirit ; 
but I say unto you, Blessed are the great in soul and the 
free in spirit, for they shall enter into Valhalla. And ye 
have heard men say, Blessed are the peacemakers; but I 
say unto you, Blessed are the warmakers, for they shall be 
called, if not the children of Jahva, the children of Odin, 
who is greater than Jahva. " 

A German Nostradamus Speaks 

One of their own truly wise men, Heinrich Heine, saw 
the storm approaching. Since he preceded Wanner, his 
analysis of the "philosophy of nature" which Wagner 
epitomized, is truly remarkable. His predictions of the 
coming wars to be waged by a mad German people are 
prophetic. We may well consider him the Nostradamus 
of the nineteenth century. Indeed, he is not half as mysti- 
cal and obscure as Nostradamus. Listen to him. In 1834, 
in his History and Philosophy in Germany, Heine wrote: 
"The philosopher of nature will be terrible because he will 
appear in alliance with the primitive powers of nature, 
able to evoke the demonaic energies of old German Pan- 
theism doing which there will awake in him that battle- 


madness which we find among the ancient Teutonic races 
who fought neither to kill nor conquer, but for the very 
love of fighting itself. It is the fairest merit of Christian- 
ity that it somewhat mitigated that brutal German gan- 
dium certaminis or joy of battle, but it could not destroy 
it, and should that subduing talisman, the Cross, break, 
then will come crashing and roaring forth the wild mad- 
ness of the old champions, the insane berserker rage, of 
which Northern poets say and sing. That talisman is 
brittle, and the day will come when it will pitifully break. 
The old stone gods will rise from long forgotten ruin, and 
rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes, and 
Thor, leaping to life with his giant hammer, will smash 
the Gothic cathedrals I" 

This is an accurate prediction of an anti-Christian 
movement to be launched by the Germans in preparation 
for the return of German paganism. Only by subduing 
Christianity could the Germans launch their campaign of 
complete paganism. Their attacks upon the Jews served a 
quadruple purpose. They provided a characteristically 
brutal outlet for the race theory; they afforded a Hagen 
against whom revenge could be taken for an imagined stab 
in the back ; they gave an opportunity for plunder and rob- 
bery, which was later to be extended to whole nations ; but 
most important, they were an attack on orthodox religion. 
In this instance the Nazis shrewdly picked the most vulner- 
able sector, for they counted on Christians to be dulled by 
their own prejudices into not recognizing that this was the 
beginning of an offensive against them. The sameness of 
German tactics whether in the military, political or 
psychological domains, should make them transparently 
clear. Yet such was our intellectual astigmatism that 
we failed to observe the obvious. Germany's religious 
attacks could well be described in its military terms. First 


came the Schwerpunkt, the opening thrust, against the 
Jews. Then through the opening wedge, new offensives 
were launched, the Aufrollen of military strategy against 
Catholics and Protestants. Or it might be described as the 
simple political strategem of conquering one by one. To 
achieve this result, it was necessary to prevent unity of 
resistance among the religions to be attacked. A typical 
illustration of such religious fifth columning was the plan 
of Hasse and Schoenerer (of the Pan-German League) to 
ripen Austria for German conquest as early as 1898 by 
breaking the Austrian-Catholic bond. The strategy was 
typically circuitous. First a frightful anti-Semitic cam- 
paign was organized, headed by some renegade "Catho- 
lics". Then Schoenerer and Hasse suddenly turned these 
hatreds against the Catholics themselves. Pseudo- 
evangelical German clergymen were imported from Ger- 
many, who railed against Catholics under the slogan of a 
"free from Rome" movement and "No Popery". 

The Nazi campaign against the Jews similarly revealed 
itself finally as an attack against all Christianity. The 
identity of Judeo-Christian ethics was fully exploited. Of 
course there is such an identity, as there is indeed among 
all religions. Having been conditioned to identify Judaism 
with corruption, the Germans found the proof that 
Christianity is of Jewish origin, conclusive proof of the 
corruption of Christianity. Nazi girls have added an un- 
seemly vulgarity to the program. The League of German 
Maidens has adopted the song: 

"We've given up the Christian line, 
For Christ was just a Jewish swine. 
As for his mother what a shame 
Cohn was the lady's real name." 

Despite the ineradicable impress of religious convictions, 
the Nazis succeeded in tearing away Catholic children 


from their religions schools and subjecting them to the 
infection of Nazism. They succeeded in damming the 
Protestant protest and conforming the masses of Ger- 
mans to the creeds of German antiquity. Bishops issued 
brave pronunciamentos. Pastors of all religions martyred 
themselves, but the religious revolt which would have 
flared to uncontrollable flames in almost any other coun- 
try, machine guns or no, was lacking. The profoundest of 
all human feelings has in the past ofttimes stirred revolt, 
occasionally in the very armies intended to suppress it. 
But in Germany anti-Christianity has been one of the 
least troublesome of the governmental planks. The talis- 
man, predicted Heine, would be brittle and the old stone 
gods of war would rise. So they did. Our modern Nostra- 
damus, with unfailing accuracy, foresaw the consequences. 

"And laugh not", he wrote, "at my advice. The advice 
of a dreamer who warns you against the Kanteans, Fich- 
teans and the philosophers of Nature, nor at the fantast 
who awaits in the world of things to be seen that which 
has been before in the world of shadows. Thought goes 
before the deed as lightning before the thunder. German 
thunder is indeed German, and not in a hurry, and it comes 
rolling slowly onward ; but come it will, and when ye hear 
the crash as naught ever crashed before in the whole history 
of the world, then know that der Deutsche Donner, our 
German Thunder, has at last hit the mark. At that sound 
the eagles will fall dead from on high, the lions in remotest 
deserts in Africa will draw in their tails and creep into 
their royal caves. There will be played in Germany a 
drama compared to which the French Revolution will be 
only an innocent child . . ." 

When Heine wrote these words, Germany was still 
divided. She was politically powerless. A handful of 
university professors was teaching small groups the 
philosophy of conquest and racism. Yet with a sure in- 


sight into the tendencies of the German masses, he knew 
that this was preparation for the slow but terrible German 
thunders. Other peoples then, and later, minimized the 
danger. The French were not concerned with a Germany 
split by internal feudal conflicts. Heine warned them: 
"You have more to fear from Germany set free than from 
all the Holy Alliance with all the Croats and Cossacks . . . 
We do not hate one another for external trifles, like you, 
as, for instance, ruffled vanity, or an epigram, or a visiting 
card not returned. No, we hate in our enemies the deepest, 
the most essential part in them that is, thought itself." 

Those who are apt in the interpretation of prophecies 
might see in the clause "eagles will fall dead from on high" 
reference to the awesome aerial conflict one hundred and 
six years later, and in the phrase "lions in the remotest 
deserts of Africa will draw in their tails" a prediction of 
the Libyan campaigns. But more important is Heine's 
recognition that Germans hated thought itself and would 
some day attempt to demonstrate the power of sheer bar- 
barism over intellectualism. His statement that German 
thunder will make the French Revolution appear like "an 
innocent child" is filled with significance. The French 
Revolution like the Nazi Revolution was prepared by 
philosophers, but Voltaire, Rousseau and Diderot were 
humanitarians, and their philosophy sought to liberate 
the masses. The same aspirations for liberty, equality and 
fraternity were voiced by Locke, Heine and many others. 
German philosophers, however, sought to enslave the 
people. German philosophy is sui generis. It is derived 
from barbarism, polished and made more dangerous by 
Kultur. It remains, however, the tooth-and-claw phil- 
osophy, modernized with airplane teeth and tank claws. 
The centuries have not altered it. The evolution of man, 
which developed his spiritual qualities, has been resisted 
by the Germans. 


Hitler's Inheritance 

Hitler did not create a new movement. He inherited 
an old one as old as the German people. He did not write 
a new program. He collated the planks of Pan-Germanism, 
which anteceded him by many generations. He did not 
evolve a military plan. He followed the Prussian text for 
conquest, revised technically by the lessons the military 
caste had received in each succeeding war. He did not 
devise a time table or a method. They were publicly 
printed by other Germans decades ago. So devoted were 
the German people to the ideal of world conquest that 
books flourished which prophesied the manner in which 
this national obsession was to be fulfilled. Many predic- 
tions were written in the present tense to thrill the reader 
with a sense of reality. For example, in 1900, the book 
Grossdeutschland und Mitteleuropa um das Jahr 1950 
foresaw the triumphant day as falling in 1950 : "All Ger- 
mans have been united, Holland enters the German union ; 
in Belgium, the Flemings grow in power and because the 
French element causes increasing trouble, Germany is 
obliged to intervene. . . . Maybe the French will fight, 
in which case all Belgium will be annexed and incor- 
porated in the German World Empire ... in the year 
1950 Great World Germany will possess a population of 
two hundred millions. Everybody is happy because all the 
Germans are now united and are ruling the world !" 

Another author foresaw a much earlier triumph. In 
Germania Triumphans he writes: "Around about 1915 
the whole world starts trembling. Two great states take 
action in self-defense, America and Russia. America pro- 
claims aloud the doctrine of Pan-America. Russia con- 
cludes customs treaties with Turkey, Persia and China". 
The war is described, including the prediction that "the 
United States, declining to give way, the German, 


Italian, and French navies mobilize and set sail for 
America. The American navy is destroyed. On land, the 
German armies made short work of the American mer- 
cenaries. Under the brilliant leadership of the German 
Leader, the Germans were everywhere victorious. On sea 
the German ships, guns and men showed their superiority 
over the English, who were regularly defeated. German 
discipline, courage and skill made the German navy in- 
vincible. The British navy was destroyed. Invaded, the 
English offered but a half-hearted resistance. The German 
and Italian soldiers seized London. England and America 
were defeated. Peace was concluded." Even the details of 
the peace terms were not omitted. They include, among 
many other provisions, Germany's acquisition of Mexico, 
and of almost all South America, with a few morsels for 

This day-dreaming literature abounded in Germany at 
all times and was accepted by the German people with a 
mixture of enthusiasm and matter-of-factness. Maps were 
not limited in Germany to their customary purposes. They 
were geographical predictions of how the world would 
look when the glorious day of German world domination 
arrived. Just as authors vied with each other to predict 
the precise nature of the "German thunder," when finally 
it would be heard, so map makers competed to give visual 
demonstrations of Der Tag. In this profuse literature 
will be found substantially all the strategy, tactics and 
even the sequence later adopted by the Nazis; detailed 
descriptions of how Norway would be conquered by sur- 
prise German soldiers hiding in freighters which moved 
innocently into the ports; how Denmark and Holland 
would be pounced upon to protect the right flank, before 
armies moved into Belgium and France ; how a non-aggres- 
sion pact would be made with Russia to immobolize her 


until France had been destroyed, and then how Kussia 
would be attacked without warning this and much more, 
even to the details of so-called timing, was written before 
Hitler was born. 

One of the excerpts quoted was written in 1895. Yet the 
author speaks of "the brilliant leadership of the German 
Leader." The fuehrership principle was always accepted 
in Germany. There is an anxiety to be blindly obedient 
which amazes other people. The German is ready to sub- 
jugate himself to achieve his mission. A people which 
despises the liberty of others learns to consider liberty a 
vice for itself. 

So Hitler even inherited a worshipful, unquestioning 
acquiescence. In this instance the tradition of fealty re- 
ceived more than the usual test. He was not a domineer- 
ing Prussian, whose curved, defiant mustache bespoke 
power through ruthlessness. That would have appealed to 
the people. He was not a trained military scientist, whose 
education fitted him for the task of conquest. That would 
have inspired respect and admiration. He was not an 
imposing figure, fitting the Wagnerian symbol of Her- 
culean Aryanism. That would have stirred pride in the 
German heart. No, he was an hysterical, ignorant, funny- 
looking little man, who spoke bad German and was laughed 
at and scorned when he ranted ineffectually in Munich 
beer halls. Genius has since been attributed to him be- 
cause of the successful conquests by the Germany army. 
But these evil achievements were due to an efficient Gen- 
eral Staff, which never ceased to exist even after the first 
World War. 

Hitler inherited that General Staff and also an efficient 
army secretly trained in "Sport Clubs" and "Athletic 
Organizations." Above all, let credit be given where 
it is due the German military successes were achieved 


by the perfect soldiery of millions of eager Germans ful- 
filling their world mission. Since total war requires that 
the entire civilian population serve on the home front, 
credit should likewise be given to the millions of Ger- 
man men and women and children who fanatically con- 
sidered it a privilege to contribute to Der Tag. One of 
the reasons for German military success is that warfare 
has developed so that not only armies, but populations 
down to boys and girls in their teens play an important 
role in the horrible game. Automatically this has been 
a great advantage to the Germans. For while other popu- 
lations have responded only when brutally attacked, the 
German people needed no other incentive than the oppor- 
tunity to conquer. 

Though the German people would probably consider 
their soldierly qualities a great compliment, we can weigh 
them soberly in the scales of responsibility. These are 
the attributes of German aggression: eagerness for war, 
valor and blind obedience, and long-planned military effi- 
ciency. They are often mistaken for the genius of Hitler. 
Germans would have achieved the same, or possibly better, 
military results under another leader. They almost suc- 
ceeded for the Kaiser, who has not been considered a 
genius, and they succeeded for Bismarck. Hitler contrib- 
uted very little to the German Drang. 

When the substantial forces which preached isolation- 
ism in the United States are estimated in the light of 
Hitler's arrogance, one shudders to think what might 
have happened if the German Fuehrer had spoken with 
diplomatic correctness, disguising his brutality with Mach- 
iavellian explanations, and lulling our senses with compli- 
ments and assurances. 

Suppose he had cleverly respected the Christian Church 
and given lip service to its ideals? Suppose he had elim- 


inated or at least delayed the pogroms? Suppose he had 
concocted incidents with the nations he attacked (as the 
Marco Polo bridge incident was created ) ? Might we not 
have been so deceived and divided that the Lease-Lend Act 
which saved England would not have been possible? Might 
we not have failed to enact military conscription before 
we were attacked? Might we not have refused to become 
the arsenal of democracy? Suppose Hitler had possessed 
an infinitesimal part of Napoleon's, or even Frederick the 
Great's, administrative capacity, he might have created a 
"new order" in the conquered territories, which might 
have given the semblance of security, peace, and a little 
justice. Then millions of exhausted, disillusioned people 
might have accepted their conqueror and eased his prob- 
lems. Instead, his one-track mind, devoted to butchery 
and terrorism, fanned the dying embers of resistance, so 
that constant revolution and anarchy burned the heels of 
the oppressor. 

Hitler's interference with the General Staff has re- 
sulted in military disasters. Notable instances were his 
insistence on attacking Moscow late in 1941, when his mili- 
tary advisers warned that a winter line should be stabil- 
ized, and his decision to attack Stalingrad in 1942, against 
his generals' advice that this would be too costly and that, 
instead, a continued attack in the Caucasus was indicated 
by military science. Originally Hitler was somewhat 
deferential towards the trained General Staff. But as 
victories were turned into hysterical propaganda for his 
genius, he yielded to self-deception and actually made 
the ludicrous announcement, in removing General von 
Brauchitsch, that henceforth his intuition would direct the 
Russian campaign. 

Some day, from the vantage point of historical per- 
spective, we may find that the German plot against the 


world failed by only a fraction, and that the egomaniacal 
stupidity of Hitler defeated a movement so thoroughly 
prepared and devotedly executed by the German people 
that intelligent leadership might have crowned it with 

Lightning Struck Twice 

Never again must we be deluded into misplacing re- 
sponsibility for German aggression. It is not the leader 
of the day, whether he be Charlemagne, Barbarossa, Fred- 
erick Wilhelm, the Great Elector, Frederick the Great, 
Bismarck, the Kaiser or Hitler, who wages war against 
mankind. It is the German people. Conditioned by cen- 
turies of false indoctrination of a mad philosophy, of an 
absurd "soil-blood" racial theory, of a mystical paganism, 
the German people have ever been arch-conspirators 
against civilization. They have deliberately plotted to 
destroy it and subdue all mankind to serfdom. They have 
given their brains, their energies and their very lives 
through the centuries in fanatical devotion to this task. 
They have used inhuman and sadistic methods to achieve 
their psychotic national desires. They have ignored all 
civilized standards and restraints, and have made barbar- 
ism an ideal. They have distorted nationalism into a 
ritual of international murder. 

This is the greatest indictment of a people in all his- 
tory. But it is the truth. Unless we recognize it as such, 
we will be unable to cope with the German problem and 
that problem has been, and will continue to be, the greatest 
threat to future peace. For defeat will not deter the Ger- 
mans from their determined criminality. They will force 
war upon the world again and again. Each succeeding 
effort comes frighteningly closer to success. The next 
slaughter, inflicted by rabid, wild-eyed Nazi youths grown 


to manhood, may actually blow out the light of civiliza- 
tion forever. We dare not fail the peace this time, and 
the first step in our precautions must be a clear, unflinch- 
ing realization that the problem is the German people, and 
that they include, and are not to be separated from, their 
leaders and their military caste. 

Once this bitter fact is recognized, we can give proper 
values to the exceptions. The most generous view is that 
the individual German is quite normal in his ethical out- 
look, but that en masse he is welded into an evil machine. 
Goethe said : "I have often felt a bitter pang at the thought 
of the German people so estimable as individuals and so 
wretched in the whole." This schizophrenic national trait 
makes the German think that Germany is all, and every 
individual, nothing. 

Another explanation for the phenomenon of national 
bestiality in a people which has produced Lessing, Schil- 
ler, Kant, Beethoven, Holderlin and Goethe, is that the 
great spirits among them have never influenced the gov- 
ernment or the masses. Certainly they were not national- 
ists. Klaus Mann has written that they were great 
Europeans who considered it beneath their dignity to be 
concerned with social problems and necessities. Emil Lud- 
wig, while conceding that the intellectual leaders ap- 
plauded the conquests of the Kaiser and provided him with 
a philosophy to support his invasion, blames it all on the 
German admiration for violence and respect for uniforms. 
But he, too, contends for the noble exception and illustrates 
it by a two-tier bus, the upper passengers having a broad 
view but having no control of the direction below. 
Whether the intellectual in Germany has merely forfeited 
his rights, or whether he, too, finds the wine of national 
conquest too heady, does not alter the conclusion. 


We shall not consider every German a vicious repre- 
sentative of his nation's corruptness. Indeed, we shall 
call upon the decent elements of that people to aid in a 
just reconstruction. We shall see that they have much to 
contribute. We shall neither persecute the innocent indi- 
vidual, nor absolve the German masses because of the 
exceptions. We will not gamble upon their reformation, 
nor make that reformation impossible by reciprocal brutal- 
ity. Since we do not share their racial theory, we will 
not turn it against them, and conclude that they are a 
corrupt people in their very blood and beyond the possibil- 
ity of redemption. 

What, then, shall we do with the German people? The 
answer requires consideration of four problems. First, 
punishment of the violators of International Law and the 
dictates of humanity. Second, the prophylactic precau- 
tions against the recurrence of German militarism. Third, 
an economic and financial policy of reconstruction. Fourth, 
eradication (by education) of the poisonous doctrines of 
Pan-Germanism, so that Germany may safely join the 
community of civilized nations. 

These will be considered in turn. 




A civil wrong merely disturbs an individual. A crime 
is of concern to all citizens and endangers their safety 
no matter how vicariously. The assaulter is a threat to all 
citizens, not to the particular victim alone. That is why 
the community prosecutes. 

This principle is magnified by international relations. 
Elihu Root pointed out that breaches of International 
Law were erroneously treated as if they concerned only 
the particular nation upon which the injury was inflicted 
and the nation inflicting it. He proposed that each 
nation should have the right to protest against violations 
of the laws of war, even though the lives and property of 
its own nationals had not been directly affected. In no 
other manner could there be developed "a real public 
opinion of the world responding to the duty of preserving 
the law inviolate." 

A violation of International Law is a crime against 
all the peoples of the world. The immediate victims are 
not the only peoples who have a right to demand justice. 

In the realm of international relations we must have 
the strength to decree just punishment to the unjust, par- 
ticularly when their wickedness has exceeded all concepts 
of horrifying brutality of which the mind is capable. Let 
no voice, confused by good intentions, be heeded which ad- 
vises us to cast down the sword of justice after we have 
been mutilated by the sword of conquest. The whole world 


demands punishment, legally administered, and commen- 
surate with the crime of each individual. 

No finely spun arguments about the endlessness of hate 
must deter us from our duty. Justice requires punish- 
ment. "It is as expedient," said Plato, "that a wicked 
man be punished as that a sick man be cured by a physi- 
cian; for all chastisement is a kind of medicine." If the 
criminal hates his sentence, let him remember that at 
least it was legally imposed on proper proof of guilt. His 
victims were innocently butchered. Yes, often for no 
other reason than that they were fine men of intellectual 
capacity or of courageous revulsion to barbarity. 

We recognize the necessity of feudlessness in society. 
We shall deal with the constructive plans for develop- 
ing international relationships freed from the hunger 
of lingering revenge. But no hopes for a brotherly society 
can be realized by ignoring hideous crimes in the hope of 
appealing to the criminal's good will. Such a program 
would be an unforgettable injustice to the survivors of 
the German terror. They can hate, too, and they would 
hate with all the bitterness of disillusionment as well as 
betrayal, if penalties were not imposed on the wrong- 

If penalties are to be meted out to the guilty, they 
must be in accordance with law. Otherwise they become 
mere retaliation and lose their full moral impress. 

This instantly brings us to the realm of International 
Law, a subject of such mysterious and intangible propor- 
tions to the lawyer as well as to the common man that it 
is shrouded in pedantic obscurantism. 

The Common Sense of International Law 

Domestic law, as distinguished from International 
Law, is the crystallization of common sense filtered and 


purified by centuries of experience. It aids us in main- 
taining order with justice, in a complex society. Each na- 
tion enacts statutes expressing its laws and endeavoring 
thereby to give fair notice to its citizens of what they may 
or may not do. 

Laws grow in number as the wisdom of the times 
determines what is just and unjust in a developing society. 
Since infinite varieties of situations arise, which statutes 
cannot foresee or provide for, courts endeavor by rea- 
sonable interpretation to apply the laws to each variation. 
Thus there grows up a body of common law. In sovereign 
states, statutes and interpretive or judge-made laws con- 
stantly develop. The law is therefore not a static thing 
but a dynamic growth adjusting itself to the necessities 
of society. It expresses the rules under which that society 

International Law has no different objective. But 
there is no international society of nations, and no inter- 
national sovereign state. Consequently, there are no 
statutes enacted by an international legislature. More 
important, there are no international courts which consti- 
tute a compulsory forum for disputes. Finally, there is 
no international enforcement agency to give practical 
meaning to international rights and duties. 

Yet International Law has existed for centuries. What 
then is it? It is the customs and usages which have grown 
up among nations in their dealings with one another. 
It is often expressed in treaties, which are international 
contracts setting forth the intentions of sovereign states 
rather than mere private parties. Sometimes it is expressed 
in international conventions assembled for the very pur- 
pose of codifying the rules of international intercourse. 
Sometimes it is found in recognized treatises. Whatever 
its source, it derives from the need for definite rules of 


conduct to guide international as well as domestic rela- 

The most important founts of International Law are 
those pacts among nations which sought to outlaw war 
as a means of determining disputes. Notable amongst these 
was the Pact of Paris, more commonly known as the 
Briand-Kellogg Pact of 1928. Fifteen nations, including 
Germany, Japan and Italy, signed the Pact at its incep- 
tion, and by January 1929, twenty-one nations had ratified 
the agreement, solemnly declaring "that they condemn re- 
course to war for the solution of international contro- 
versies, and renounce it as an instrument of national policy 
in their relations with one another." 

Of course, the Covenant of the League of Nations, 
signed by fifty-seven nations, again including Germany, 
had made similar resolve. Also, the Statute of the Per- 
manent Court of International Justice and the Protocol 
ratified by forty-nine nations was in aid of this policy 
of peaceful determination of disputes. 

These various agreements automatically became bind- 
ing tenets of International Law. As Dr. Baye, a delegate 
said, "The state which in contravention of the Pact of 
Paris begins a war must be branded as an offender against 
the Law of Nations, as a criminal against humanity." 

Hitler, after his rise to power, ratified these commit- 
ments of Germany. The Four Power Pact, otherwise 
called the Pact of Eome entered into on July 7, 1933 
by Hitler's Germany, Great Britain, France and Italy 
recites in its preamble : 

"Faithful to the obligations which they have assumed 
by virtue of the Covenant of the League of Nations, the 
Locarno Treaties and the Briand-Kellogg Pact, and taking 
into account that declaration of the renunciation of force, 
the principle of which was proclaimed in the declaration 


signed at Geneva on December 11, 1932, by their delegates 
at the Disarmament Conference and adopted on March 2, 
1933, by the Political Commission of that conference. . . ." 

Furthermore the German-Polish Pact of Non-Aggres- 
sion was entered into on January 26, 1934. In this the 
Briand-Kellogg Pact was set forth at length. Hitler ex- 
pressly referred to the Pact which had become the most 
important post-war provision of International Law. He 
specifically incorporated this treaty and its terms in his 
pact with Poland. 

By subsequent ratification these resolutions became 
more deeply imbedded in International Law. In Septem- 
ber, 1934, the International Law Association, meeting in 
Budapest, adopted Articles of Interpretation of the 
Briand-Kellogg Pact. It declared that a nation which vio- 
lated the provision outlawing war would be "an offender 
against the Law of Nations." 

Thus we are not dealing with some prior concept of 
International Law which the Nazis might reject because 
it antedated them. There is no room for contention as to 
the binding nature of international agreements which have 
been formally and voluntarily accepted. The Budapest 
Articles of Interpretation of 1934 declared that "A signa- 
tory state cannot by denunciation or non-observance of 
the Pact release itself from its obligations thereunder" and 
further "that a signatory state which threatens resort to 
armed force for the solution of an international dispute 
or conflict is guilty of a violation of the Pact." Such an in- 
terpretation merely codified common sense. If a party to 
a contract could cancel it by breach, then contracts would 
be valueless. They would cease to be binding whenever it 
no longer suited one of the parties to comply. The whole 
purpose of agreement would be destroyed. It would no 
longer be dishonorable to break one's word, for the very 


act of bad faith would be declared to be the annulment of 
the agreement. 

We conclude, then, that Germany, was bound by In- 
ternational Law not to make war. But in addition, as 
we shall see, it was also bound to comply with certain 
rules if it did, illegally, declare war. 

Unfortunately, the relationships between nations are 
not always peaceful, and war affects neutrals as well as 
belligerents. Thus there was need for some codification of 
the rules which should apply between belligerents, and 
between belligerents and neutral nations. This has become 
one of the chief functions of International Law: the de- 
termination of the rules of war. 

At first blush, it would appear to be mere scholasticism 
to make rules as to how men may or may not kill each 
other. But such laws have a function as a restraint upon 
barbarism, even if they appear to sanction killing when 
done in accordance with rules. 

One may be opposed to the brutality of prize fights and 
yet recognize the value of the Queensbury rules. Inter- 
national Law, as it applies to war, is the aspiration of 
mankind that even in battle not all concepts of mercy 
and gallantry will be abandoned. It ultilizes the con- 
science of mankind as a restraint upon animalism. It 
seeks to canalize world opinion so that it may exert 
pressure upon the warrior to limit his depredations and 
to respect even in warfare some of the religious and moral 
precepts to which civilization clings. 

Exact statements of these Rules of War are to be 
found in the Geneva Conventions of 1864, 1906 and 1929, 
the International Convention relative to the Treatment of 
Prisoners of War in 1929, and the Hague Conventions of 
1899 and 1907. The Hague Convention of 1907 imposed 
numerous restrictions upon invading or occupying forces. 
They must respect the laws in force in the country (Article 


43), the religious convictions, family honor and lives and 
private property of its inhabitants (Article 46). Pillage 
is forbidden (Article 47). No general penalty, pecuniary 
or otherwise, may be inflicted upon the population for the 
acts of individuals (Article 50). The property of religi- 
ous, charitable and educational institutions and objects 
of art and science must be treated as private property 
and may not be molested (Article 56). 

The methods of combat are also restricted in the in- 
terest of humanity. The Convention forbids a belligerent : 
to employ poison or poisoned arms, to kill or wound by 
treachery, to employ arms, projectiles and substances which 
are calculated to cause unnecessary pain (Article 23). 
Bombardment by naval forces of undefended towns is for- 
bidden (Articles 1-6). The use of automatic submarine 
contact mines is condemned because of their danger to in- 
nocent vessels (Article 20). Discharging explosives "from 
balloons" is similarly outlawed. 

The provision forbidding forced labor by the civil 
population in occupied districts dates back to the Brussels 
Conference of 1874 and is now an accepted doctrine of In- 
ternational Law. Another provision, firmly imbedded in 
International Law, is that merchantmen may not be sunk 
without previous visit and search and without placing the 
passengers and crew of the vessel in safety. German 
submarine warfare is brazen piratical practice, not an act 
of war. 

Thus we conclude that Germany was bound to obey 
the Rules of War, a duty which fell upon every soldier, 
officer and civilian of the Reich. What does this duty en- 
tail? To what extent do the rules of International Law 
condemn the individual German for his acts, once war has 
been declared? He is immune only if he acts within the 
rules prescribed for warfare. If he commits an act in vio- 
lation of the laws of war, he is liable to trial and punish- 


ment by the courts of the injured adversary. In 1880 
the Institute of International Law expressly affirmed this 
doctrine. Article 84 of its Manual of the Laws of War on 
Land, adopted at Oxford that year, declared that "The 
offending parties should be punished, after judicial hear- 
ing, by the belligerent in whose hands they are." It was 
further added that "offenders against the laws of war are 
liable to the punishment specified in the penal or criminal 

Acts of pillage, incendiarism, rape, assassination, mal- 
treatment of prisoners and similar violations of the rules 
of Avar are crimes. The soldiers who commit them are not 
immune because they were committed in the course of war. 
Acts of war, ordinarily crimes, are "legal" only if they 
are committed in conformity to the rules of International 

In the United States, the Supreme Court has held that 
soldiers are not liable for acts done by them in accordance 
with the usage of civilized warfare and by military au- 
thority. (Dow v. Johnson, 100 U. S. 158; Freedland V. 
Williams, 131 U. S. 405.) The negative proposition is 
also true, that if soldiers have committed acts in violation 
of these rules they are personally responsible. 

The French Code of Military Justice provided that 
"every individual who, in the zone of operations, despoils 
a wounded, sick or dead soldier shall be punished by impris- 
onment and every individual who commits violence on such 
a soldier shall be put to death" (Article 249). Obviously 
this referred not only to the French soldier but to any 
enemy soldier who committed such a crime. 

The American Basic Field Manual "Rules of Land 
Warfare" (1914) provide punishment for acts of pillage 
and maltreatment of wounded (Article 112), for inten- 
tionally injuring or killing an enemy already disabled, 
etc. These rules apply equally to soldiers of the Army of 


the United States and to an enemy captured after having 
committed the misdeed. 

The British Manual of Military Law has similar pro- 

Germany fully recognized the validity of these stand- 
ards, and she may not now contend that they are not bind- 
ing on her. The German Kriegsbrauch im Landkriege 
declares that the inhabitants of occupied territory must 
not be injured in life, limb, honor or freedom; that every 
unlawful killing, every bodily injury due to fraud or negli- 
gence, every insult, every disturbance of domestic peace, 
every attack on family, honor or morality, and generally, 
every unlawful act of violence is punishable as though it 
had been committed against the inhabitants of Germany. 
The code prohibits all destruction, devastation, burning 
and ravaging of the enemy's country, and declares that 
the soldier who does such acts is "an offender according 
to the appropriate law." It also declares that the seizure 
and carrying away of money, jewelry, and other objects of 
value is criminal theft and punishable as such. 

When at the Hague Conference of 1907 rules were be- 
ing formulated with regard to automatic submarine con- 
tact mines, the German Chief Delegate, Baron Adolf 
Marschall von Bieberstein delivered himself as follows: 
"A belligerent who lays mines assumes a very heavy re- 
sponsibility towards neutrals and shipping. On that point 
we are all agreed. No one will resort to such means un- 
less for military reasons of an absolutely urgent character. 
But military acts are not governed solely by principles of 
International Law. There are other factors: conscience, 
good sense, and the sentiment of duty imposed by prin- 
ciples of humanity will be the surest guides to the conduct 
of sailors, and will constitute the most effective guaranty 
against abuses. The officers of the German Navy, I em- 
phatically affirm, will always fulfill in the strictest manner 


the duties which emanate from the unwritten law of 
humanity and civilization." 

This statement is a recognition of those principles of 
International Law which are not reduced to written stat- 
utes, but which derive their force from the dictates of 
"humanity and civilization." 

It has been charged that "International Law is filmy, 
gauzy, founded upon precedent and without certainty, de- 
cision or definiteness," but the discerning will see the 
definiteness and grandeur of moral codes which have 
grown with the development of civilization. 

The civilized world intends to indict and convict the 
Germans for their violations of International Law. In 
the words of the Moscow Declaration issued by President 
Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill and Premier Stalin 
on November 1, 1943 : 

"At the time of granting of any armistice to any gov- 
ernment which may be set up in Germany, those German 
officers and men and members of the Nazi party who have 
been responsible for or have taken a consenting part in 
the above atrocities, massacres and executions will be sent 
back to the countries in which their abominable deeds were 
done in order that they may be judged and punished ac- 
cording to the laws of these liberated countries and of the 
free governments which will be erected therein. . . . Let 
those who have hitherto not imbued their hands with 
innocent blood beware lest they join the ranks of the 
guilty, for most assuredly the three Allied powers will 
pursue them to the uttermost ends of the earth and will 
deliver them to their accusers in order that justice may 
be done." 

The World Undertakes a Task 

Similar determination and brave words were not 
enough in 1918. Then, too, the whole world demanded 


punishment. French women presented the following reso- 
lution to the Peace Conference: 

"In violation of the primitive law of humanity, thou- 
sands of women and girls, even children, of all social con- 
ditions have been systematically torn from their families 
and submitted to inhuman tortures and treated as slaves. 
With broken and bleeding hearts, we women of France 
and the Allied countries come before the Peace Congress 
to ask justice in the name of our martyred sisters. To 
prevent a recurrence of similar atrocities, we ask that 
those who have directed them and ordered them may be 
condemned as criminals." 

A foremost French author who compiled a list of in- 
ternational crimes concluded : "Probably there is no senti- 
ment more generally prevailing in the world today than 
the demand for the punishment of those who fought the 
most atrocious war in history in the most atrocious way." 

A legal report by distinguished French professors of 
International Law (Ferdinand Larnaude, Dean of the 
Paris Law Faculty, and Dr. A. G. de Lapradelle, Professor 
of International Law on the same Faculty) listed the 
crimes of the Germans, thus giving scholarly basis to 
the outcries of the peoples of the ravaged nations. For 
example, they cited a letter from the Kaiser to the Em- 
peror of Austria, which, as part of the diplomatic archives, 
fell into the hands of the Allies. The Kaiser wrote : 

"My soul is torn asunder, but everything must be put 
to fire and blood. The throats of men and women, chil- 
dren and the aged must be cut and not a tree nor a house 
left standing. 

"With such methods of terror, which alone can strike 
so degenerate a people as the French, the war will finish 
before two months, while if I use humanitarian methods, 


it may prolong for years. Despite all my repugnance, I 
have had to choose the first system." 

Here is the familiar hypocrisy of the Germans justify- 
ing barbarism on grounds of mercy. The Nazis have ex- 
tended it with the addendum that those who do not accept 
enslavement and defeat are responsible for the disturbance 
of the peace which results from their resistance. Thus all 
victims are warmongers. The Germans seek and wish 
peace. They are compelled to slay if their superiority is 
not acknowledged with bowed head. 

Clemenceau in his speech of acceptance of the Presi- 
dency of the Peace Conference said : 

"I come now to the order of the day. The first ques- 
tion is as follows: 'The responsibility of the authors of 
the war!' The second is thus expressed: 'Penalties for 
crimes committed during the war.' We beg of you to 
begin by examining the question as to the responsibility 
of the authors of the war. I do not need to set forth our 
reasons for this. If we wish to establish justice in the 
world we can do so now, for we have won victory and can 
impose the penalties demanded by justice. We shall in- 
sist on the imposition of penalties on the authors of the 
abominable crimes committed during the war." 

Overwhelming public opinion beat upon the Peace Con- 
ference, demanding punishment of the guilty. The Peace 
Conference acted, but its extensive steps to set up tribun- 
als and mete out punishment ended in a complete fiasco. 
Why did the efforts of so many brilliant men to com- 
ply with these demands for simple justice go awry? It 
is important to analyze this failure in order to reach wiser 
decisions today. We will be aided in finding the correct 
road by observing the by-paths of confusion which our 


predecessors followed. Rarely in the realm of political 
science is so rich an opportunity afforded to learn from 
past history. Then as now the Germans were the offenders, 
against almost the entire world. Then as now their out- 
rages were admitted, though they were child's play com- 
pared with Nazi thoroughness and sadism. Then as now 
the world dreamed of a permanent peace and was desirous 
of making all possible concessions to achieve it except 
surrender the right to punish for the criminal acts. 

The Versailles Conference began brilliantly. It was 
the first treaty of peace in which an attempt was made by 
the victorious belligerents to enforce against a defeated 
adversary the principle of individual responsibility for 
crimes committed during war. It formally declared that 
individuals belonging to armed forces of the adversary, as 
well as enemy civil functionaries, were responsible under 
military law for violations of International Law. Article 
228 of the Treaty stated that Germany recognized "the 
right of the Allied and Associated Powers to bring before 
military tribunals persons accused of having committed 
acts in violation of the laws and customs of war." Also : 
"Such persons shall, if found guilty, be sentenced to pun- 
ishment laid down by law. This provision will apply not- 
withstanding any proceedings or prosecution before a 
tribunal in Germany or the territory of her Allies." 

Further, the Treaty required Germany to surrender to 
the Allied and Associated Powers all persons accused of 
having committed an act in violation of the laws and cus- 
toms of war and to furnish "all documents and informa- 
tion of every kind, the production of which may be neces- 
sary to the full knowledge of the incriminating facts, the 
discovery of offenders, and the just appreciation of re- 
sponsibility" (Article 230). Identical provisions were con- 
tained in the Allies' treaty with Austria (Articles 173, 


The Previous Indictment 

A commission appointed by the Peace Conference made 
an elaborate report on four subjects: (1) the responsibility 
of the authors of the war; (2) the breaches of the laws 
and customs of war; (3) the degree of responsibility for 
these crimes attaching to particular members of the enemy 
forces; (4) the constitution and procedure of a tribunal 
appropriate for the trial of these offenses. 

The commission unanimously reported that "the war 
was premeditated by the Central Powers, together with 
their allies, Turkey and Bulgaria, and was the result of 
acts deliberately committed in order to make it unavoid- 

In support of this conclusion were cited, among other 
evidence, decoded confidential documents which had come 
into the Allies' possession from the Austrian official ar- 
chives. One was a report to the Austrian Government by 
von Wiesner, the Austro-Hungarian agent sent to Sara- 
jevo to investigate the assassination of Archduke Franz 
Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, and the 
Duchess of Hohenberg, his morganatic wife. He wired: 
"Cognizance on the part of the Serbian Government, par- 
ticipation in the murderous assault, or in its preparation, 
and supplying the weapons, proved by nothing, nor even 
to be suspected. On the contrary there are indications 
which cause this to be rejected." 

Another official document referred to was the decoded 
telegram of Count Szogyeny, Austrian ambassador at Ber- 
lin, sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs at Vienna: 

"Here it is generally taken for granted that in case of a 
possible refusal on the part of Serbia, our immediate dec- 
laration of war will be coincident with military opera- 


"Delay in beginning military operations is here con- 
sidered as a great danger because of the intervention of 
other Powers. 

"We are urgently advised to proceed at once and to con- 
front the world with a fait accompli" 

The fear was not of military intervention but lest over- 
tures for peaceful adjustment be made. This appears in 
the production of a deciphered telegram marked "strictly 
confidential", sent by the Austrian Ambassador at Berlin 
to his own government the day before war was declared. 
The material portion read: 

"The Secretary of State informed me very definitely 
and in the strictest of confidence that in the near future 
possible proposals for mediation on the part of England 
would be brought to Your Excellency's knowledge by the 
German Government. 

"The German Government gives its most bending assur- 
ance that it does not in any way associate itself with the 
proposals; on the contrary, it is absolutely opposed to 
their consideration and only transmits them in compliance 
with the English request." 

The English proposal had been telegraphed by Sir 
Edward Grey, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs > to 
Sir William Edward Goschen, British Ambassador at Ber- 
lin. It read: "If the peace of Europe can be preserved, 
and the present crisis safely passed, my own endeavour 
will be to promote some arrangement to which Germany 
could be a party, by which she could be assured that no 
aggressive or hostile policy would be pursued against her 
or her Allies by France, Russia, and ourselves, jointly or 

It is unnecessary to dwell upon the analogy between 
these incidents and the frantic appeals a quarter of a cen- 
tury later by a humiliated English Prime Minister and a 


President of the United States, to Hitler to preserve peace 
and thus gain the "undying gratitude of all mankind." 

The Commission reported separately on Belgium and 
Luxemburg and reached the conclusion that the neutrality 
of both of these countries had been deliberately violated. 
It unanimously reported that "Germany, in agreement 
with Austria-Hungary, deliberately worked to defeat all 
the many conciliatory proposals made by the Entente 
Powers and their repeated efforts to avoid war." The con- 
clusion was inevitable, and grandiosely stated that these 
acts should be condemned in no uncertain terms and that 
their perpetrators should be held up to the "execration" 
of mankind. 

In the course of their findings concerning breaches 
of law and customs of war, the Commission gathered au- 
thoritative data from high sources. Reports were made by 
Lord Bryce of the British Commission and by many other 
distinguished scholars and jurists. There was no disagree- 
ment concerning the facts established. The Report unani- 
mously stated : 

"Violations of the rights of combatants, of the rights 
of civilians, . . . are multiplied in this list of the most 
cruel practices which primitive barbarism, aided by all 
the resources of modern science, could devise for the execu- 
tion of a system of terrorism carefully planned and car- 
ried out to the end. Not even prisoners, or wounded, or 
women or children have been respected by belligerents who 
deliberately sought to strike terror into every heart for the 
purpose of repressing all resistance. Murders and mas- 
sacres, tortures, shields formed of living human beings, 
collective penalties, the arrest and execution of hostages, 
the requisitioning of services for military purposes, the 
arbitrary destruction of public and private property, the 
aerial bombardment of open towns without there being any 


regular siege, the destruction of merchant ships without 
previous visit and without any precautions for the safety 
of passengers and crew, the massacre of prisoners, attacks 
on hospital ships, the poisoning of springs and wells, out- 
rages and profanation without regard for religion or the 
honor of individuals, the issue of counterfeit money re- 
ported by the Polish Government, the methodical and de- 
liberate destruction of industries with no other object than 
to promote German economic supremacy after the war, 
constitute the most striking list of crimes that has ever 
been drawn up to the eternal shame of those who com- 
mitted them. The facts are established. They are numer- 
ous and so vouched for that they admit of no doubt and 
cry for justice." 

Are these not familiar echoes? How precise the repeti- 
tion! In 1919 a Special Commission was appointed to 
classify proof and data under certain headings. Such is 
the consistency of the Hun that they may be listed here 
since they are unchanged and remain as appropriate at 
the end of the second World War as at the end of the 
first. The list of thirty- two crimes charged is : 

1) Murders and massacres; systematic terrorism. 

2) Putting hostages to death. 

3) Torture of civilians. 

4) Deliberate starvation of civilians. 

5) Kape. 

6) Abduction of girls and women for the purpose of 
enforced prostitution. 

7) Deportation of civilians. 

8) Internment of civilians under inhuman conditions. 

9) Forced labor of civilians in connection with the 
military operations of the enemy. 


10) Usurpation of sovereignty during military occupa- 

11) Compulsory enlistment of soldiers among the in- 
habitants of occupied territory. 

12) Attempts to denationalize the inhabitants' occu 
pied territory. 

13) Pillage. 

14) Confiscation of property. 

15) Exaction of illegitimate or of exorbitant contri- 
butions and requisitions. 

16) Debasement of the currency, and issue of spurious 

17) Imposition of collective penalties. 

18) Wanton devastation and destruction of property. 

19) Deliberate bombardment of undefended places. 

20) Wanton destruction of religious, charitable, edu- 
cational and historic buildings and monuments. 

21) Destruction of merchant ships and passenger ves- 
sels without warning and without provision for 
the safety of passenger or crew. 

22) Destruction of fishing boats and of relief ships. 

23) Deliberate bombardment of hospitals. 

24) Attack on and destruction of hospital ships. 

25) Breach of other rules relating to the Red Cross. 

26) Use of deleterious and asphyxiating gases. 

27) Use of explosive^ or expanding bullets, and other 
inhuman appliances. 

28) Directions to give no quarter. 

29 ) Ill-treatment of wounded and prisoners of war. 

30) Employment of prisoners of war on unauthorized 


31) Misuse of flags of truce. 

32) Poisoning wells. 

Here, then, was unanimity on the subject of German 
criminality. The Commission recommended that the 
guilty be punished. 

The American- Japanese "Axis" 

American representatives vigorously dissented from 
the procedure suggested by the Commission to punish the 
violations. Their sole comrades in dissent were the Jap- 
anese. They found it necessary to submit a lengthy 
memorandum of their minority views. Robert Lansing and 
James Brown Scott, who wrote this memorandum, sought 
eloquently to diminish the friction which had arisen from 
the conflict in opinion. ". . . we desire to express our 
high appreciation", they wrote, "of the conciliatory and 
considerate spirit manifested by our colleagues through- 
out the many and protracted sessions of the Commission. 
From the first of these, there was an earnest purpose 
shown to compose the difference which existed, to find a 
formula acceptable to all, and to render, if possible, a 
unanimous report. That this purpose failed was not be- 
cause of want of effort on the part of this Commission. 
It failed because, after all the proposed means of adjust- 
ment had been tested with frank and open minds, no 
practicable way could be found to harmonize the differ- 
ence without an abandonment of principles which were 
fundamental. This the representatives of the United 
States could not do and they could not expect it of others." 

What were the differences which could not be adjusted 
without abandonment of principles? And what were the 
principles involved? An analysis of this struggle and the 
opportunity, not available to the contestants, to test their 


theories pragmatically in the light of subsequent history, 
will point to certain definite conclusions about the proper 
solution today. 

American delegates objected to the following language : 
". . . all persons belonging to enemy countries, however 
high their position may have been, without distinction of 
rank, including chiefs of states, who have been guilty of 
offenses against the laws and customs of war or the laws 
of humanity, are liable to criminal prosecution." 

They contended that the laws of humanity were too 
uncertain to be the basis of criminal prosecution. The 
laws and customs of war, they admitted, were sufficiently 
certain. They were to be found "in books of authority and 
in the practice of nations." But they balked at the legal 
prosecution of "chiefs of state" whose responsibility had 
never before been established in municipal or international 
law, and "for which no precedents are to be found in the 
modern practice of nations." 

They were particularly solicitous about not bringing 
the ex-Kaiser to criminal trial. They contended that a 
chief executive, whether he be called emperor, king, or 
kaiser, is not responsible for breaches of law. He is an- 
swerable "not to the judicial, but to the political authority 
of his country." They relied on Chief Justice Marshall's 
decision in the early case of Schooner Exchange v. McFad- 
don and Others, 7 Cranch. 116, decided in 1812, in which 
a sovereign was held to be exempt from judicial process. 

What they overlooked was that the doctrine of im- 
munity of heads and ex-heads of state from the jurisdic- 
tion of foreign courts (de Haber v. Queen of Portugal, 17 
Q. B. 171 ; Hatch v. Baez, 7 Hun. 596 ; Underhill v. Her- 
nandez, 168 U. S. 250), is not a binding doctrine of Inter- 
national Law. It is merely a voluntary rule of interna- 
tional comity and public policy and is intended to prevent 
the courts of one state from interfering with another 


country's sovereign in the discharge of his duties. It was 
not intended to shield heads of states from punishment for 
crimes against the rights of other nations. No authority 
states that an abdicated or deposed chief of state can not 
be arraigned before an international tribunal for high 
crimes committed by him against other nations while he 
was in power. 

The Peace Conference having set a new precedent in 
asserting personal responsibility for individual offend- 
ers against the laws of war, of what consequence was 
the objection that there was no precedent for punishing 
such a violator who happened to be an ex-head of state? 
It is an elementary principle of democracy that no man, 
however high his station, is above the law. Heads of 
state who permit, approve and even encourage the com- 
mission of crimes by their subordinates, are equally guilty 
with them and cannot take refuge in a plea of immunity 
intended to shield them from their crimes. 

The American and Japanese dissent was unjustified. 
It was nothing but legal dilettantism to distinguish be- 
tween legal and moral crimes and to profess helplessness 
to deal with the latter. True, the crimes committed were 
unprecedented. Do they derive immunity from that very 
fact? Are we so devoid of conscientious resourcefulness 
that we are unable to punish a crime so heinous that it 
was never committed before? Precedents are valuable 
guide posts, but they are not more important than the 
road, and roads may be constructed to a necessary objec- 
tive without them. It is distorted emphasis to consider 
precedent more important than justice. Prior experience 
merely advises us how others applied their wisdom. Often 
it is a comfort ; sometimes it does nothing more than reveal 
error and encourage us to seek the right conclusion. If 
lack of precedent paralyzed our intellectual initiative, 
there would be no common law, for at some point each rule 


adopted was a pioneering effort to be tested by subsequent, 
not prior, experience. 

It is not without ironic significance that the dissenting 
Americans found support from the two Japanese members 
of the commission who doubted that offenders against the 
laws of war, belonging to the forces of an adversary, could 
be tried before a court constituted of opposing belligerents. 
We may wonder today whether the Japanese shared the 
refined moral view of the Americans or whether their 
agreement in dissent revealed the lack of true moral in- 
dignation against the world's greatest crimes. 

The Judicial System Never Used 

Despite the disagreement of the American and Japan- 
ese, the Peace Conference adopted the majority report of 
the Commission that there was no reason why rank, how- 
ever exalted, should "in any circumstances protect the 
holder of it from responsibility when that responsibility 
has been established before a properly constituted tri- 
bunal. This extends even to the heads of states." All 
offenses against "the laws and customs of war or the laws 
of humanity are liable to prosecution." 

As to the acts which provoked the war, a distinction 
was made. These were not made the object of criminal 
proceedings, but a special court was organized to fix re- 
sponsibility. Art. 227 of the Treaty provided: 

"The Allied and Associated Powers publicly arraign 
William II of Hohenzollern, formerly German Emperor, 
for a supreme offence against international morality and 
the sanctity of treaties. A special tribunal will be con- 
stituted to try the accused, thereby assuring him the guar- 
antees essential to the right of defense. It will be com- 
posed of five judges, one appointed by each of the following 
Powers: namely the United States of America, Great 


Britain, France, Italy and Japan. In its decision the 
tribunal will be guided by the highest motives of inter- 
national policy, with a view to vindicating the solemn 
obligations of international undertakings and the validity 
of international morality. It will be its duty to fix the 
punishment which it considers should be imposed. The 
Allied and Associated Powers will address a request to 
the government of the Netherlands for the surrender to 
them of the ex-Emperor in order that he may be put on 

The request was made. The Dutch Government refused 
to surrender the ex-Kaiser. "This Government," it stated 
in its reply, "cannot admit any other duty than that im- 
posed upon it by the laws of the Kingdom and national 
tradition". According to this tradition "Holland has al- 
ways been regarded as a refuge for the vanquished in in- 
ternational conflicts" and the government could not refuse 
"to the former Emperor the benefit of the laws and this 
tradition" and thus "betray the faith of those who have 
confided themselves to their free institutions." Holland 
refused to betray the faith of the Kaiser. Shades of Rot- 
terdam ! 

As a result of Holland's solicitude for the Kaiser, the 
special court designated to fix responsibility for the war 
and the breach of treaty never met. It found itself with- 
out any defendant to prosecute. 

Another juristic mechanism to punish those who had 
violated International Law was the authorization to each 
country to try before its own military or civil courts any 
prisoner who was charged with an offense. 

Where the offender had not been captured, or where the 
violation affected several nations (such as maltreatment 
of prisoners of different nationalities herded into one 


camp) a special High Tribunal was created to try them. 
It was composed of twenty-two judges, three each ap- 
pointed by the United States, the British Empire, France, 
Italy and Japan and one each appointed by Belgium, 
Greece, Poland, Portugal, Kumania, Serbia and Czecho- 
slovakia. The law to be applied by the tribunal was to be 
"the principles of the law of nations as they result from 
the usages established among civilized peoples, from the 
laws of humanity and from the dictates of public con- 
science." The High Tribunal had the power to impose such 
punishment as the courts of the accusing nation or the 
courts of the prisoner's nation, could have meted out. It 
was to determine its own procedure and could sit in divi- 
sions of not less than five members. A Prosecuting Com- 
mission of five members was appointed to select and try 
cases, upon the request of any nation. It was composed 
of one appointee from each of the governments of the 
United States, the British Empire, France, Italy and 
Japan. Other Allied governments had the right to dele- 
gate a representative to assist the Prosecuting Commis- 
sion. A national court, that is, the military or civil court 
of any nation, was not permitted to prosecute any prisoner 
who had been selected by the Prosecuting Commission for 
trial before the High Tribunal. It was specifically pro- 
vided that no trial or sentence by a court of a defeated 
enemy could bar trial by an Allied national court or by the 
High Tribunal. 

This was the elaborate machinery set up to punish the 
German offenders. It was thorough and practical. The 
manner in which it was sabotaged constitutes one of the 
great betrayals in history. Mountains of dead had been 
piled up so that free men could have control over a just 
peace. But the men to whom the responsibility was en- 
trusted were unable to live up to it. They were out- 
manoeuvered, deceived and blocked by the defeated. The 


result was unrequited infamy. The most costly victory 
on the battlefield in all history was nullified by a skillful 
obstructive campaign during peace. This story affords an 
object lesson which must be fully studied and appreciated 
if the peace is not to be lost again. However, more is to 
be learned than mere avoidance of the repeated betrayal of 
justice. There is revealed in this historic evasion the 
intrinsic character and tendencies of the German people, 
as well as of their criminal overlords. 

Germany Does a Houdini 

German avoidance of punishment began by encourag- 
ing the view (held in certain Allied quarters) that the 
German people felt deeply aggrieved by the outrageous 
conduct of their leaders and that they were anxious to pun- 
ish them. It was pointed out that the German people, too, 
had suffered under the compulsion of Prussian militarism. 
Germany had been reduced to its plight by the avarice of 
its militarists. There was a unity of interest between the 
Allied peoples and the German people in seeing that 
justice was done and the guilty punished. Indeed, it was 
argued that the German people had a special stake in car- 
rying out the penalty clauses, for the distinction between 
the rulers and the people would thereby be established. In 
placing responsibility on the former, the latter would be 
absolved. Credibility was given to this by some public 
statements in Germany. Dr. Hans Delbruck and other 
conservative politicians appealed to the German govern- 
ment to appoint a committee of impartial men, including 
prominent neutrals, to investigate accusations of breaches 
of International Law by Germany during the war. These 
appeals demanded that the inquiry be conducted regard- 
less of the rank or dignity of the accused persons so that 
"the German people may be able to clear its conscience.'' 


A German State Tribunal was organized. It was in 
the nature of a parliamentary committee to establish the 
war guilt. The first session was held in Berlin. Count 
Johann-Heinrich A. von Bernstorff appeared as a witness 
and testified, among other things, how the German Em- 
peror disdained the peace offer of President Wilson. Beth- 
mann-Hollweg, who was the German Chancellor at the 
time of the invasion of Belgium, testified evasively. Other 
witnesses, like von Kapelle and von Koch, were examined 
concerning the submarine warfare. The German National 
Party leader, Helferrich, appeared before the Tribunal, 
openly praised the old regime, and assailed President Wil- 
son. He refused to answer questions by a Deputy, was 
fined for contempt, but persisted in his contumacy. 

When Hindenburg was invited to appear, many na- 
tionalists protested and Pan-German students objected to 
his appearing before the Committee. Finally, a list of 
questions was prepared and sent to Hindenburg. Then he 
appeared. An adoring audience strewed flowers in his 
path. This was the manner in which the German people 
expressed their feelings about their "criminal betrayers". 
That this was no demonstration by a personal coterie is 
established by Hindenburg's subsequent election as Presi- 
dent of the Republic. He testified that he had urged the 
institution and continuance of the U-boat war and took 
this occasion to plant the lie that the Germans had not 
been defeated militarily but that a knife of betrayal had 
been plunged into Germany's back at home, while her 
soldiers were still victorious in the field. The Committee, 
embarrassed and confused by finding defendants who de- 
fiantly confessed guilt, ordered a secret session. The Tribu- 
nal then adjourned and never met again. 

Hjalmar Branting, writing for the Swedish newspaper, 
Social Demokraten, rightly called the proceedings of 
this parliamentary investigating committee a "parody." 


The Commission took flight into adjournment, after stand- 
ing, humbly bowing, before its pre-revolutionary masters. 
It had not dared call important witnesses, including the 
Kaiser. Indeed, the German Peace Envoy, Schucking, in 
an interview in the New Zuerichcr Zeitung, said: "I am 
astonished that the idea of prosecuting former Emperor 
William and his generals is seriously entertained." 

Branting wrote, "Everything indicates that the old 
spirit is raising its head more impudently than ever. We 
can hear beforehand the furious protests echoing through 
the German press when the Allies some day tire of this 
farce and demand extradition of the culprits for a real 
trial by a real investigating committee which will stand 
before humanity as a moral judge to brand those guilty 
according to each one's part in the most terrible disaster 
that has ever befallen humanity in civilized times." 

This first attempt by the Germans to draw the teeth 
from the Allied program was too inept to succeed. German 
awe for its own leaders intervened to defeat the effort. 
Timorous adjournment could not be held out as self- 
regulation, which would make Allied interposition unneces- 

The Allies were aroused by the German people's solici- 
tude for their militarists. They organized the tribunals 
provided for by the Versailles Treaty. They demanded 
the extradition of those accused of war crimes. In the 
meantime the United States Senate had rejected the 
Peace Treaty. Instantly the Berlin Foreign Office declared 
that this rejection justified Germany's repudiation of the 
criminal-trial clauses in the Treaty and demanded that 
concessions be made by the Allies. This repercussion 
from American isolationism in 1919 has never been suf- 
ficiently studied. The German Republic, newly born, 
pounced upon the division in its enemies' ranks and, even 


in defeat, launched an offensive, as its successor so fre- 
quently did fourteen years later. It was a diplomatic 
offensive designed, not to give relief to the suffering Ger- 
man people, but to shield the officials and heartless army 
officers of the "prior" regime from punishment. 

Encouraged by the popular resentment in Germany 
against the Allied demand, Baron von Lersner, German 
representative at the Peace Conference, declined to deliver 
the Allies' extradition request to his government in 
Berlin. Clemenceau's reply to von Lersner's refusal is 
an extraordinary mixture of incredulity at German incor- 
rigibility and of instructive insight into German inconsist- 
ency. He wrote, "The Germans themselves do not deny that 
numerous crimes have been committed and that universal 
morality would be seriously injured if these crimes, whose 
authors are known, remain unpunished. Any human being 
going through the northern regions of France, as well as 
into Belguim, and also seeing with his own eyes these 
provinces systematically ravaged, with all industrial 
establishments leveled to the ground, dwellings reduced 
to dust by savage methods, all the fruit trees sawed within 
a meter of the ground, mines blown up and filled with 
water, human work of entire centuries spitefully anni- 
hilated, cannot understand Germany's hesitation to con- 
sent to the reparation for her crimes. 

"If the same impartial observers then heard from the 
mouths of the inhabitants the tale of the treatment to 
which they had been subjected for four years and the vio- 
lences and the abominable constraints imposed upon 
young girls brutally separated from their families, he 
would be unable to restrain his indignation in face of the 
attitude of Germany and the arrogant tone of your letters. 

"As to the Allies, they are profoundly surprised to see 
that German public opinion, even at the present time, is 


so unconscious of its responsibilities as not itself to ask, 
for the just punishment of crimes committed, and that 
among the criminals there seems to be neither sufficient 
courage nor patriotism to come forward for trial as they 
have deserved, to defend their conduct and to facilitate 
for their country the fulfillment of its obligation. 

"Until the German conscience understands, like that 
of the whole world, that wrong must be righted and crim- 
inals punished, Germany must not expect to enter the 
communion of nations nor obtain from the Allies forget- 
fulness of her crimes. 

Although it was announced by M. Ignace, Under Secre- 
tary of the French Ministry of Justice, that there was not 
the slightest disposition on the part of the Allies to 
weaken in their demands for the surrender of the accused 
Germans and that "all of the guilty ones will pay quickly 
wherever they are and whoever they are," German defiance 
had its effect. The list of accused was reduced to only 
fifteen hundred names, although tens of thousands should 
have been dealt with. 

Baron von Lersner again defied the Allies and sub- 
mitted a memorandum stating that the German National 
Assembly had passed a law providing that Germans 
accused of war crimes should be tried only in German 
courts. The British and French representatives rejected 
the memorandum and announced that the trials would be 
held in Paris and in Lille. 

The Germans then indulged in a series of delaying 
actions. They kept the demand for extradition in the 
discussion stage while refusing to comply. In the mean- 
time, carefully arranged popular demonstrations were 
held within Germany, thus reversing the procedure and 
putting pressure on the Allies. In January 5, 1920, a 
Pan-German conference was held in Berlin, at which there 


was an open demonstration against extradition. Chancellor 
Scheidemann predicted that Germany would conduct the 
trials, and that the Allies "would calm themselves." 

The Council of Ambassadors in London sought to over- 
come Baron von Lersner's refusal to submit the demand 
formally, by sending it directly to Berlin. The demands 
were transmitted through the various Embassies of the 
Allies situated in Berlin. By this time the list of accused 
had shrunk to 896. England demanded the trial of only 
97 persons, Belgium 334, France 334, Italy 29, Poland 
57, and Rumania, 41. Among the accused were Generals 
Hindenberg, Ludendorff and von Mackensen, Prince 
Rupprecht of Bavaria, the Duke of Wtirtenburg, ex-Chan- 
cellor von Bethmann-Hollweg, and a number of admirals, 
including von Tirpitz. It included General Stenger, who 
had issued written orders directing his soldiers not to 
take prisoners, but to kill all captives. 

The restricted nature of this list made it virtually a 
demand for a token demonstration of "punishment." The 
outrages committed ranged in the tens of thousands. Yet 
fewer than 900 men in Germany out of a population of 
60 million and an army of twelve million were to be 
extradited. Obviously, the Allies were endeavoring to 
make submission by Germany as painless as possible. 
Almost without exception, those listed were bitter mili- 
tarists, chiefly of the Prussian military caste. These men 
were supposed to be hated by the simple and kindly Ger- 
man people. They were supposed to be the cruel over-lords 
who had brought the unwitting, undesigning masses of 
Germans to their misery. 

One would expect that it would be popular in Germany 
to wreak vengeance on its betrayers. Ordinarily a 
depressed people is avid for a victim. Revolutionary 
groups count on the burning desire for revenge against 


the prior ruling forces. Therefore, even if the German 
nationalistic leaders had not been as guilty as they were, 
one would not expect that compassion would flow to them 
from the people they had led to defeat. Despite all fine 
distinctions between the German people and their leaders, 
the German Republic, voicing the sentiments of the com- 
mon man in Germany remained loyal to those very leaders. 
The Republic continued to sacrifice its own interests, not 
to improve its lot, by shielding the sacrosanct reputations 
and persons of the generals. 

Socialist Minister Noske announced in reply to the 
demand for extradition, now formally submitted, that 
surrender was impossible. Chancellor Bauer echoed the 
same sentiment. The German Council of Ministers met 
and decided to refuse the demand for extradition. The 
German Officers Association called the nation to defiance. 
University students in Berlin opposed surrender. They 
held a formal banquet to proclaim their opposition. 

The Germans not only acted as if they were victors, 
diplomatically challenging other nations, but revealed a 
complete misconception of the issue at stake. They inter- 
preted the demand for extradition not as an insistence 
for the punishment of guilt, but rather as a symbolic 

The German Crown Prince therefore sent a cable to 
President Wilson declaring his willingness to substitute 
himself in place of the 896 persons listed for extradition. 
The hostage idea in reverse! To the Germans it would 
be no miscarriage of justice if hundreds of guilty went 
free and one presumably innocent man was condemned. 
It would martyrize the hero and change the symbolism 
from humiliation to glorious sacrifice. If the Crown 
Prince himself was guilty of the violation of International 
Law, his punishment ought not to absolve 895 others. 


If h were innocent, his immolation would constitute 
injustice rather than justice. Even if it were conceivable 
to engage in bargains in justice, the transaction was 
rather top-heavy. No reply was sent to the Crown Prince's 

Lest it be considered a libel upon the German people 
to say that their loyalties to militarist leaders never wav- 
ered, we need only trace their own conduct. Even the 
processes of democracy were utilized to express opposition 
to the punishment clauses of the Treaty. The German gov- 
ernment formally submitted its recommendations to the 
German National Assembly in Weimar. The voice of the 
people was thus permitted to express itself through its 
newly elected legislature. It was a new voice, but the echo 
of unreasonable nationalistic pride was the same. The 
National Assembly voted to support the government's po- 
sition against extradition. Minister Noske reaffirmed that 
neither he nor anyone else would order an arrest for the 
purpose of extradition. 

As a sop to the A] lies, and in a further effort to devital- 
ize their insistence upon their rights, the Attorney General 
at Leipzig was ordered to investigate complaints against 
persons accused of crimes and to arrange for their trials. 

The program of sabotage continued with all the effi- 
ciency and artfulness of which the Germans are capable. 
Envoys were continually sent to Paris and London with 
varying schemes of compromise. Every conceivable sug- 
gestion was put forward except compliance with the 
Treaty which Germany had signed only a short time pre-' 
viously. Allied statesmen were kept in constant turmoil 
while the debates were deliberately prolonged. 

In the meantime, Germany resorted to unscrupulous 
pressure behind the scenes. It annulled the German-Bel- 
gian financial agreement because of Belgium's participa- 


tion in the extradition demands. Thus Germany, even in 
defeat, was punishing rather than being punished. 

The Allies were faced with the necessity of using force 
to extradite the guilty culprits. Many of them had mean- 
while fled to Switzerland and Holland. They fled, not 
from the wrath of the German people, but in connivance 
with them against their old enemies. Admiral von 
Kapelle, one of the accused, brazenly announced his arrival 
in Davos, Switzerland. It was a deliberate nose-thumbing 
gesture at the Allies and swelled the German heart with 
delight and relief. 

Everywhere in Allied circles there were strong groups 
preaching caution and avoidance of conflict. The Allies 
surrendered. Their reply to the German note of January 
25, 1920 was that they accepted the proposal to have Ger- 
many itself try the criminals at Leipzig! 

In an article which he wrote later for the archives of 
German history, von Lersner concludes with a Wagnerian 
trumpet note : "This first great demand which the Entente 
Governments imposed on us by virtue of the Diktat von 
Versailles was shattered, like glass upon a stone, against 
the unity of the German people." 

The German government then shrewdly eased the sit- 
uation for the Allies. Announcement was made that the 
German government intended vigorously to prosecute 
every man on the extradition list against whom there was 
prima facie evidence of the commission of a crime. The 
National Assembly enacted a bill to organize the trials in 
Germany. Seven judges were designated. The Minister 
of Justice announced that he would arrest any defendant 
who was refractory. The German press, however, ex- 
plained to the people that there really was no intention 
on the part of the government to yield. The Nationalist 
Deutsche Zeitung in Berlin explained that the Allies 
merely desired a few "sample convictions" and that the 


trial of a few men would be sufficient. Thus, the list of 
thousands, which had shrunk to 1500 and then to 896, 
dwindled to 14. 

German Courts Slap Several Wrists 

The German prosecutor advised the Allies that he had 
difficulty in obtaining evidence. The Allies undertook to 
prepare seven cases. Preliminary examinations were con- 
ducted in France and Belgium; depositions were taken in 
London. Witnesses were collected from across the seas 
and brought to Leipzig. The trials began two and one- 
half years after the war ended. Only four of these seven 
defendants were tried. 

The Oberreichsanwalt (public prosecutor) was "un- 
able" to find the three others against whom the Allies had 
prepared evidence. One, U-boat Commander Patzig, was in 
Danzig, but his address "was unknown." Another, Trinke, 
had become a resident of Poland, and Lieutenant-Com- 
mander Werner, they said, could not be traced. 

Lieutenants Ludwig Dithmar and John Boldt, sub- 
ordinates of Patzig, were put on trial for sinking without 
warning the British hospital ship, Llandovery Castle, and 
then firing on and sinking its life-boats, killing 234 
wounded passengers. They were found guilty and sen- 
tenced to four years imprisonment. Boldt was held at 
Holstenplatz, a house of detention at Hamburg, where 
ordinarily only indicted, not convicted, prisoners are kept. 
He was permitted a private room, communication with the 
outside world, and civilian clothes. He promptly "escaped" 
and was taken by accessories to safety across the Dutch 
frontier. The other prisoner convicted for the U-boat 
atrocity also mysteriously "escaped." 

Another trial was that of Captain Emil Miller, who 
was charged with inflicting sadistic cruelties on numerous 


prisoners and with maintaining such atrocious prison con- 
ditions that hundreds of prisoners died. The Leipzig 
Court found: 

"The accused admits that he liked, as soon as he ap- 
peared at roll-call, to ride quickly up the ranks. The pris- 
oners scattered on all sides and many who could not get 
out of the way quickly were thrown down by the horse. 
The accused once struck Drewcock at roll-call across his 
wounded knee with his riding cane so hard that an abscess 
developed and later had to be cut. The accused could not 
have foreseen this for the wounds on Drewcock's knee were 
not visible to him. According to the statement of the wit- 
ness Lovegrove, the accused once saw two sick men lying 
down; they were so weak they could not stand up before 
him, and were groaning pitifully. But the accused is said 
to have got angry and impatient and to have kicked them. 
There is a possibility that the accused did not wish to hurt 
the men, whose sickness he apparently did not yet believe 
to be real, but that he only wished to secure that his order 
to get up was immediately obeyed." 

For the sixteen offenses of which he was found guilty 
Captain Miller was sentenced to a total of six months im- 

General Stenger, commander of the 58th Brigade, was 
tried on charges that he had ordered the massacre of 
wounded war prisoners. His order dated August 26, 1914 
was presented to the court. It read : 

"(a) Beginning with today, no more prisoners will be 
taken. All prisoners, whether wounded or not, must be 
destroyed ; 

"(b) All prisoners will be massacred; the wounded, 
whether armed or not, massacred; even men captured in 


large or organized units will be massacred. Behind us, 
no enemy must remain alive." 

Nevertheless, Stenger was acquitted. The German 
Major who executed his orders was convicted for "mis- 
interpreting" them. 

The few others who appeared for trial sobbed about 
their patriotism, and were instantly acquitted. 

The French and English observers who attended the 
first trials withdrew. They reported the bad faith in which 
the proceedings were being conducted. The Allied com- 
mission sent bitter memoranda objecting to the procedure. 
But German "justice" took its course. 

The trials in the Supreme Couat at Leipzig were a farce. 
From hundreds of thousands of offenders, the Allies had 
drawn a list of only 1500, subsequently reduced to 896. 
None of the chief figures was even molested. Of those 
tried, a few were convicted and received preposterously 
light sentences. In most instances even these were not 

It had been argued by the Germans that it was unfair 
for the former enemy to conduct these trials, even though 
the courts were to be constituted of internationally known 
jurists. In view of the attitude of the German people, 
the trials conducted by themselves were equivalent to the 
criminals setting up their own tribunals and prosecuting 
themselves. When the Allies protested, the German Repub- 
lic brazenly demanded more concessions. It even sent a 
note to Lloyd George demanding that Germans held by 
the Allies be surrendered for trial in the German courts ! 

Such is the record of German evasion and bad faith. 
The sonorous and extensive reports by the various com- 
missions of the Versailles Conference concerning punish- 
ment; the establishment of a Special Tribunal to try the 
Kaiser and other responsible leaders; the debates which 


raged furiously for years about the principles involved, 
all seem pretty ludicrous in the light of the record. The 
Germans, defeated and helpless, succeeded in nullifying 
one of the most important clauses of the Treaty, and the 
process began within a week after their delegates had 
solemnly signed it. This circumvention was practiced by 
the German Eepublic. The "democratic" forces which 
were in power conspired with the Junkers to prevent any 
punishment of those who had betrayed Germany. 

This history provides a clear answer to the not incon- 
siderable body of opinion today that the Germans should be 
permitted to punish their own; that only such a self- 
purge would be devoid of nationalistic incitation against 
"foreign intervention." 

On the contrary, the United Nations must adjudge the 
guilt and impose the punishment. They must eradicate 
completely those elements which not only planned and 
waged the last war, but which will constitute the bridge 
between defeat and a third World War. 

Judgment Day 

How this shall be done becomes clearer if we under- 
stand our previous failure. Wide avenues of choice are 
narrowed by the lessons of history. Its wisdom shuts off 
many by-paths and directs us down the following program- 
matic road: 

1. Occupation of Germany Its Sovereignty Suspended 

There will be as many national and international mili- 
tary and civil courts as will be needed to try promptly the 
hundreds of thousands of German offenders in all parts of 
the world. But the prosecuting authorities will not be 
able to bring to justice every one of the many millions who 
will be guilty. This fact should be faced realistically. It 


is true of criminal procedure even in ordinary times. Not 
every offender is indicted and tried. To a certain extent, 
law enforcement is symbolic. The punishment of the most 
important criminals and a fair proportion of others is 
intended to act as a deterrent, and to discourage those who 
measure their conduct by the possibilities of punishment 
rather than by social obligation. So, in the international 
realm, not every German who has violated the rules of 
International Law will receive his just deserts. The people 
as a whole must be taken into "protective custody," to use 
a German expression in its sincere sense. We have dealt 
at length with the responsibility of the German people, 
not in the individual sense, but as a group. They, and not 
merely their leaders, are the cause of the slaughter. We 
have previously resolved not to permit the exceptions to 
blind us to this fact. They, exceptions and all, cannot be 
trusted to preserve the peace. Their state, the corporate 
entity through which they have acted, must be dissolved. 
Their nationhood must be forfeited until such time as they 
demonstrate their reform by the acceptance of civilized 
standards. In short, German sovereignity must be sus- 
pended. The country must be completely occupied by the 
forces of the United Nations. 

Those who fear that the burdens of occupation will be 
too heavy upon the victors may take comfort from the fact 
that the Allied Military Government has performed its 
functions heretofore with ease as well as efficiency. In the 
beginning, the occupation of Germany will involve its 
investment by large military forces. But as the disarma- 
ment and other features of the peace program, which we 
will discuss later, are being effectuated, the police control 
will dwindle to token proportions. Germany's terror of 
internal chaos, and the consequences to the safety of its 
people as well as its self-interest in a reduction of occupa- 
tion costs, may result in co-operation not at present en- 


visaged. Psychologically, a complete occupation is a 
necessary prerequisite to the educational program later 
to be discussed. The best answer to the myth of in- 
vincibility must be so conclusive a demonstration of defeat 
that spurious contentions about the "undefeated German 
Armies" can never again be made. By any criterion, the 
burdens of a prolonged occupation are a cheap price for 
this contribution to peace. 

Unlike German occupations, it will be benevolent and 
friendly as well as firm. There will be no plundering, 
mass executions or hostages. But we will not heed any 
nationalistic protests about Germany's right to inde- 
pendent action and sovereignty as a nation. The criminal 
state may no more demand its freedom than the individual 
criminal. Confinement is the result of its own conduct, 
and a necessity for maintaining peace. 

Thus at one fell swoop the many juristic concepts 
which plagued the representatives at Versailles will be 
removed. The American and Japanese minority report on 
that occasion asserting the principle that a sovereign is 
responsible only to his own people will not be possible 
again. Having agreed to destroy Germany's statehood 
for its crimes, we will not listen to quibbles about the 
immunity of its ex-sovereign. Technical international 
problems illustrated by the declaration Churchill was ob- 
liged to make that Rudolph Hess is a prisoner of state, 
because, if he were a prisoner of war, he would have to be 
released when the war ended, will be avoided. There will 
be no German government to refuse to turn over war crim- 
inals, to conduct its own sham trials, to threaten smaller 
nations with economic injury if they do not cooperate with 
her against the victors, to receive loans while reparations 
are unpaid, and, above all, to plan economically and mili- 
tarily for the next try at world conquest. There being no 
sovereignty, there would be no professional army of 


100,000 men such as Germany was permitted last time, in 
addition to a small navy. This implied assent to the 
existence of a General Staff (and the perpetuation of the 
warrior caste) would therefore not be given. At the end of 
the first World War we dealt with the "new" German gov- 
ernment, even though such recognition was in itself the 
absolution of the German people from their responsibility ! 
There ought to be no peace treaty with Germany, 
for treaties can be made only between two sovereign 
states. The treaty should await Germany's emergence from 
probation into statehood. Since it is not likely that Ger- 
many, despite the program we shall discuss later, will have 
learned to accept the standards of international good be- 
havior for a long time, it may be contemplated that the 
peace treaty will be suspended for ten or twenty years, or 
perhaps more. Thus the evil will be avoided of settling 
disputes while the flames of war still heat the passions, and 
its smoke beclouds a historic perspective. It is now gen- 
erally agreed among qualified observers of our last Peace 
Conference that the procedure of solving the world's ills 
under the pressure of time and national "lobbying" is in- 
advisable. The whole atmosphere of a peace conference 
immediately following a war is conducive to frayed 
nerves, emotional instability, and make-shift arrange- 
ments. Even the best advance planning cannot anticipate 
the emergencies which will arise for Europe may be torn 
by a whole series of readjusting revolts with unforeseeable 
consequences. Some of these upheavals and crises, which 
would loom large in a close perspective, may be only the 
minor convulsions preceding the birth of a new order, and 
of no lasting consequence. Yet to provide immediate 
permanent solution may be to sow the seeds of more ag- 
gravating future crises. General military control under 
an armistice and the gradual evolution of peace plans not 
frozen in a peace treaty are preferable. 


2. Who Shall Be Punished 

Nazi group leaders must be the first to be punished. 
Proof of their guilt is abundant. The armistice terms 
should simply declare them guilty. It would be farcical to 
try Hitler, Himmler, Goering, Streicher, Ley or other 
mass murderers. They have written the evidence of their 
guilt in blood on every pavement in Europe. The dossiers 
of the United Nations are bulging with data of their un- 
surpassed brutality. A trial tribunal should permit them 
to be heard on the questions of proper identification and 
the extent of the punishment, but no more. 

As a Russian declaration states "All mankind already 
is aware of the names and sanguinary crimes of the ring- 
leaders of the criminal Hitlerite chain. . . . The Soviet 
Government considers itself, as well as the governments 
of all states . . . obliged to regard severe punishment of 
these already unmasked ringleaders of the criminal Hit- 
lerite gang as its urgent duty to innumerable widows and 
orphans, relatives and kin of those innocent people who 
have been brutally tortured to death and murdered on in- 
structions of the criminals." 

In addition to distinguished legal authority for the 
needlessness of trials under such circumstances, there is 
also international precedent. Napoleon was never tried. 
By a formal convention among England, Austria, Prussia, 
and Russia on August 2, 1815, he was declared to be their 
common prisoner, to be permanently confined without 
trial. The Prince Regent of England gave the reason in a 
letter to Napoleon, in which he said this decision was 
necessary in order not to give him "any further oppor- 
tunity of disturbing the peace of Europe." 

It may be contended by those finicky about judicial 
propriety that no injury could come from a public trial 
and that it would avoid criticism against the "absolutism" 


of the procedure. However, International Law is still to 
be molded on these critical problems, and it would have a 
salutary effect if the rule adopted were suitable to the 
heinousness of the offenses and the public anxiety for swift 
and certain punishment. The enormity of the crimes an- 
nounced by the criminals themselves and the existence of 
millions of witnesses, make the requirement of proof an 
empty formalism. Since the purpose of the procedure is 
also to deter future international crime, any lumbering, 
awkward ritual to prove the self-evident would only cause 
contempt rather than respect for law. There is a point at 
which solicitude for a possible innocent victim of a severe 
rule becomes mawkish over-caution. We must be concerned 
with the dictates of common sense. 

The ordinary man and woman must feel the majesty of 
law, the directness and practicability of its procedure, and 
its avoidance of routine ceremony. Only then will the 
thirst for retribution be directed into healthy legal chan- 
nels. Otherwise, frustration may set in motion forces of 
violence far more serious than any legal unorthodoxy. 

However, whether the arch-criminals are tried in a 
military or criminal court is a comparatively minor 
point. Certainly their names and the charges against 
them should be prepared in advance and included in the 
very armistice provisions. Those condemned by name in 
the armistice should include the Fuehrer, the members of 
his cabinet, the Gauleiters, and the members of the High 
Command, governors of the occupied regions, and the lead- 
ing bureaucrats in the state, municipal and Nazi Party 
organizations. These would number approximately five 
thousand men. Death penalties should be demanded. This 
would dispose of the commanding figures of the party and 
government. The United Nations could then turn to the 
lesser criminals. 


Next, the leaders of German mass organizations should 
be indicted and tried. The Gestapo and Labor Front have 
about 75,000 such officials. In addition, there are about 
75,000 subordinates who organized and taught the S. S., 
the Peasant Front and other such organizations. This 
entire group of about 150,000 men were the whole-hearted 
fanatical Nazis upon whom the ruling group relied. Death 
penalties should be sought against each of them. 

Every German officer above the rank of colonel, in- 
cluding corresponding ranks in the Air Force and Navy, 
every member of the Gestapo, S.S. officials, and members 
of the German People's Court and of the German Reichs- 
tag, should be indicted and tried. 

Every German official, no matter how subordinate, who 
at any time gave or performed orders for the execution of 
hostages or the murder of conquered nationals, should be 
indicted, tried, and the death penalty sought. 

In addition, the armistice should provide for the com- 
plete dissolution of the Officers Corps of the German army 
as well as of the army itself. Those among them who have 
violated any criminal or international law should be tried, 
and appropriate severe penalties imposed. 

Any administrator, no matter how subordinate, who 
participated in the plunder of foreign countries, all di- 
rectors of the German Steel Trust, of I. G. Farben or of 
the other German cartels, who, as we shall see later, par- 
ticipated in the conspiracy against world peace should be 
indicted, and appropriate severe penalties imposed. 

Irrespective of rank or position, every soldier or 
civilian should be tried, against whom charges are filed 
involving any violation of law. 

It is only by such thorough methods that the backbone 
of Nazism and Prussianism can be smashed and the dan- 
ger of future aggression reduced. 


3. Asylum and Extradition 

There is no problem concerning those defendants who 
are under the control of the United Nations. The armistice 
should provide for their surrender for trial upon proper 
demand. A serious problem will arise as to any accused 
who has fled to a neutral state. This problem will assume 
large proportions since Berne, Switzerland, is only half an 
hour from Munich by plane. Malmo, Sweden, is only fif- 
teen minutes from Stettin, and Spain is just across the 
border from France. Once in a neutral country, Nazis 
will claim the right of asylum, as the Kaiser claimed it 
in 1918. Unless steps are taken now to prevent it, the 
same immunity will ensue. There must be no sedentary, 
reflective old age for the greatest disrupters in history. 

Recently President Roosevelt and Prime Minister 
Churchill appealed to neutral states not to harbor or 
protect any war criminals. They were rebuffed on the 
theory that the independence of action of the neutral state 
must not be yielded to any foreign intervention. But the 
matter must not rest there. It must be made clear to 
Switzerland, Sweden, Turkey, Spain, Eire and the few 
other potential havens of war criminals that the doctrine 
of political asylum is not a rule of International Law. It 
is a kind of international noblesse oblige, resting solely 
in the discretion of the neutral and intended to shield the 
politically oppressed. But to apply it to the Nazis, who 
have destroyed so many neutral nations, would be a mis- 
application of a humane rule. If it will aid in clarifying 
this murky misconception among the neutral nations, there 
may be cited the decision in the Federal Court of Germany 
in 1926 (60 Entsch. in Strafsacher 202) which denied the 
existence of any rule of International Law prohibiting the 
extradition of political offenders. There is additional 
legal authority to the same effect ("Harvard Research 


on International Law", Encyclopedia of the Social 
Sciences) (1935, p. 110). 

Perhaps the position of the neutral states was in- 
fluenced by the fact that the Nazis were still in power 
when the President's appeal was addressed to them. Their 
very assertion of independence might well indicate their 
lack of it, since the Nazi beast breathed heavily upon their 
necks. Perhaps they will change their minds when the 
war criminal changes from hunter to quarry. However, 
the matter should be pursued vigorously. Strong efforts 
should be made to persuade the neutral nations to amend 
their extradition treaties so that persons who have waged 
a war of aggression or who have violated International 
Law shall not be considered political refugees. If this 
were done, they would be subject to extradition like any 
other criminal. Small neutral nations should be too 
anxious for the good-will of the United Nations and the 
advantages of cooperative action to risk all for the sake of 
a distorted rule. The moral force behind demand for 
extradition will be quite real, because almost every neutral 
country borders nations which have been outraged by the 
Germans and which will be inflamed against a neighbor 
that shields the guilty parties. Furthermore, any neutral 
country harboring the criminals will also court the in- 
ternal protest of its own citizens, for the peoples of the 
world will have a common sympathy in this matter. If the 
subject is treated firmly enough in advance, neutral 
nations may seek to avoid embarrassment and may refuse 
entry to the fugitives in the first instance. It may be that 
one of the results of the total war will be that the offenders 
will have no place to flee. By their very aggressions they 
will have wiped out the asylum which might otherwise 
be available to them. 


4. Is Obedience to a Command a Defense f 

The responsibility of soldiers for acts committed under 
orders must be determined in advance. To what extent 
should such a defense be considered valid? 

Discipline is one of the recognized obligations of a 
soldier. Ordinarily he may not refuse to obey under pain 
of death or imprisonment. Acting under such compulsion, 
should he be held responsible even for an illegal act? 
There are some precedents. In 1915 a French council of 
war sitting at Rennes, sentenced a German soldier to death 
for pillage, incendiarism and assassination of wounded 
soldiers on the field of battle. When arraigned before the 
council, he pleaded the formal orders of his commander, 
and he named the general from whom the order emanated 
and the lieutenant who compelled him to execute it. The 
court found him guilty nevertheless, and made a report of 
these facts to the Minister of War, so that he might recom- 
mend clemency if he desired to do so. 

While proof of mere obedience should be considered as 
mitigating punishment, it should not be deemed a com- 
plete defense. It is an axiom of English and American 
law, that the plea of "superior order" is no defense to an 
illegal act. Chief Justice Marshall said it was the duty 
of a soldier to execute the lawful orders of his superiors, 
but that he was personally liable for the execution of an 
illegal order (Little v. Barreme, 2 Cranch, 170). In a 
later case the United States Supreme Court repudiated 
the doctrine that an officer may take shelter under the plea 
of a superior command. The court said, "Upon principle, 
independent of the weight of judicial decision, it can never 
be maintained that a military officer can justify himself 
for doing an unlawful act by producing the order of his 
superior" (Mitchell v. Harmony, 13 How. 115). 


The law should not permit an offender to shift re- 
sponsibility to his superior and entirely absolve himself. 
One who commits a crime acts at his peril, irrespective of 
orders, and we have seen that infractions of International 
Law, even during war, are crimes. The profession of a 
soldier is a hazardous one and the risk should include his 
responsibility for an illegal act even when ordered to com- 
mit it. To adopt any other view would lead to absurdity 
the successive shifting of responsibility from superior to 
superior until every one was exculpated except the com- 
mander-in-chief. The doctrine of constraint should not 
absolve any person who has any share in the commission 
of a criminal act during war. At most, it may affect the 
degree, not the fact, of guilt. 

5. Practical Judicial Machinery for Punishment 

The large number of criminals to be tried and the 
necessity for speed requires an extensive judicial system. 
However, simplicity and expedition are most likely to be 
achieved by the following plan : 

The civilian and military courts of each nation should 
have jurisdiction to punish all offences committed on its 
territory. The law, procedure, and punishment would be 
that existent in the country of trial. The accused would 
come into the possession of the prosecuting nation either 
by capture, or by transfer under the armistice provisions, 
or by extradition. As we have seen, this is in accordance 
with the well-established principle of International Law 
that any nation may try an offender in its own courts if 
he comes into its hands. For example, the American 
Basic Field Manual, "Rules of Land Warfare," provides 
specifically that the remedy to a belligerent for an injury 
in violation of the "laws of war" is the "punishment of 
captured individual offenders". Thus the great mass of 


trials would be dispersed among the many aggrieved 
nations. Their judicial systems (existing or reconsti- 
tuted), including judges, prosecutors, statutes, and pro- 
cedures, would be available. Their military courts would 
be available to act in accordance with well-established 
military principles. Their prison systems could be util- 
ized and in the event of death penalties, their form of 
capital punishment applied. 

However, in addition to these national courts, other 
tribunals must be created to try offenders whose crimes 
were committed against nationals of several countries in 
combination; for example, cruelties inflicted on prisoners 
of several nations herded in one camp. There is also the 
type of case where the offense was committed against 
"stateless" persons, whose exact nationality is not cer- 
tain. In the tragic events in which nations were snuffed 
out over night, many such confusions exist. 

Most important of all, there are the trials ( should it be 
decided to proceed with the formality of trial, despite 
their evident guilt) of prominent military and naval offi- 
cials and civilian authorities who determined major 
policies. This group would include heads of state and 
their chief ministers. Their offenses transcend the juris- 
diction of the courts of any one nation. Their crimes were 
international in scope, and public indignation is also in- 
ternational. Even if any one nation might properly obtain 
jurisdiction over such an offender, it should yield to 
an international court to be created. Humanity could 
best express its dictates through such a forum. Nor is the 
least advantage from an international court the joining 
hands of all nations after the war to act concertedly in 
dealing out justice. 

Two kinds of international courts would be desirable. 
Representatives from the existing national military tri- 
bunals or commissions of the United Nations could be con- 


stituted an International Military Tribunal. As many of 
these courts could be quickly created as would be neces- 
sary to deal with the large dockets. Acting as a final 
appellate court and also as a court of original jurisdiction 
for the trial of the most important offenders would 
be an International Criminal Court especially desig- 
nated for this purpose. The judges would be appointed 
in the same manner as those chosen for the Permanent 
Court of International Justice.* It would be desirable, 
as has been recommended by Professor Sheldon Glueck, 
that neutral nations be invited to designate repre- 
sentatives on these international courts. In this way these 
courts might best represent the conscience of all mankind. 
Indeed, it would be fitting that several outstanding pro- 
democratic jurists who were hounded out of Germany 
or Italy should be appointed to this court as distinguished 
citizens of the world and not as representatives of any 
particular country. 

Any of these international courts, whether military or 
criminal, would have superseding jurisdiction. Its claim 
to try an offender would take precedence over that of any 
national court. Conversely, if a nation preferred for any 
reason not to try any particular offenders, it could request 
one of the international courts to accept jurisdiction. 

A staff of prosecutors for the international courts 
should be designated by the various countries which are 
represented on the court. To these prosecutors should 

*This court has had a distinguished record of service. More than 
forty nations have at some time accepted the opportunity to submit their 
disputes to this court. This obligation has usually been limited to a five- 
year period but some acceptances have been for ten years or have had 
no time limit. Between 1921 and 1934 there was a real approach toward 
universal recognition of a duty to submit international disputes to 
judicial settlement. This may be an encouraging precedent for those 
who are so jealous of their nation's sovereignty that they shun coop- 
eration even in an international court for the punishment of war crim- 


be submitted as early as possible the confidential data of 
the accusing governments or governments-in-exile, con- 
cerning the guilt of the accused. The prosecutions would 
proceed in advance to gather additional evidence and take 
the depositions of witnesses who may not later be available. 
In other words, the prosecutors and their efficient staffs 
should be prepared to proceed promptly after the armistice 
with as many trials as possible. Each nation should ap- 
point special prosecuting commissions to gather evidence 
for the hundreds of trials which it, rather than the inter- 
national court, will conduct. Public defenders should be 
provided for indigent prisoners. 

The Provost-Marshals of the military forces of the 
United Nations should designate police officials to arrest 
and detain accused persons and to execute sentences 
imposed. The jails, hospitals for insane and probationary 
and parole facilities of the accusing country should be 
used. Similarly, where there is conflict of law as between 
nations, the law of the accusing nation should apply. 

The armistice should provide that all evidence of guilt 
shall be turned over to the international court and that 
destruction if any such evidence must be made a serious 

6. Property Courts with Criminal Jurisdiction 

In addition to the criminal courts, special property 
courts should be created to determine disputes involving 
restitution of property. In the larger sense, this is an 
economic problem and will be treated later as such. For 
the present it will suffice to say that the Nazis robbed 
Europe of property valued at the incomprehensible sum of 
fifty billion dollars. As far as possible, these stolen goods 
must be returned, either to their rightful owners, or if 
they can no longer be determined, to the government of 


the country from which they were removed. Each victim- 
ized nation should appoint commissions to investigate 
and gather evidence concerning the stolen property. The 
secretion or destruction of such property or the refusal 
to reveal its whereabouts, should be deemed a crime and 
should be severely punished. The property courts should 
have criminal jurisdiction for this purpose. Restitution 
must be made, not only of ordinary chattels, such as money, 
machinery, works of art, commercial and industrial goods, 
cattle, and implements, but also of shares of stock or other 
symbols of ownership no matter how intricate the transfer 
and the disguises. Fortunately, the complexity of the 
task has not discouraged an early effort to cope with it. 
An Inter-Allied Information Committee in London re- 
cently reported concerning the control of various enter- 
prises obtained by German banks.* 

*Thc Deutsche Bank controlled and administered directly or in- 

Creditanstalt-Bankoverein of Vienna 

Bohmische Union-Bank of Prague 

Union-Bank of Bratislava 

Kredit Bank of Sofia 

Banka Commerciale Romana of Bucharest 

Kroatischer Bankverein of Zagreb 

Banque Nationale de Grece of Athens 

H. Albert De Bary & Co. N.V. of Amsterdam 

Deutsche Uberseeische Bank of Madrid 

General-Bank Luxemburg A.G. 

It also constitutes a significant trail that the Deutsche Bank has 
its own branches in Katowice, Bielsko, Danzig, Gdynia, Lodz, Pozman, 
Creozyn, Zoppot, Cracow, Lwow, Budapest and Brussels. 

The Dresdner Bank controlled and administered directly or indirectly: 

Landerbank A.G. of Vienna 

Kommerzcalbank A.G. of Cracow 

Ostbank A.G. of Poznan 

Oberschlesische Diskontobank A.G. of Longshutte 

Deutsche Handels-und Kredit Bank A.G. of Bratislava 

Kroatische Landesbank A.G. 

Societatea Bancara Romana of Bucharest 

Handels-und Kreditbank A.G. of Riga 

Banque d'Athenes of Athens 

Societe Financiere Greco-Allemande 

Wechelstube A.G. "Merkur" 


Those in charge of economic warfare in England and 
the United States have followed the changes in Continental 
industry and have large files on German economic activi- 
ties. These and other clues are available as to the ultimate 
resting places of the plundered goods. German fanaticism 
always stops short at one practical point. It envisages the 
possibilities of defeat and cunningly plans to retain the 
wherewithal for another try. Therefore, we shall examine 
later the skillful organizations and devices adopted by the 
Nazi to create the appearance of bona fide title to stolen 
goods and to place as many obstacles in the path of in- 
vestigation as possible. 

There will be transfers of title galore, and interming- 
ling with "valid purchases" in most cases. But loot is loot, 

Ungarische Allgemeine Kreditbank 

Bulgarische Handelsbank of Sofia 

Kontinentale Bank of Brussels and Antwerp 

Handelstrust West N.V. of Amsterdam Internationale Bank 

The London Commission further reported that the Commerzbank 
A.G. controlled and administered directly or indirectly: 
Hansabank N.V. of Brussels 
N.V. Ryinische Bank Mij. 
Banque Commerciale de Grece 
Branches at Pozman, Lodz, Cracow, Zakopane, Sosnowiec, and 

Katowice, Riga, Tallinn 
Rumanische Bank Anstalt 
Bankverein "Agram" A.G. 
Allgemeine Jugoslawische Bankverein 

The London Commission further reported that the Berliner Handels- 
gesellschaft controlled and administered directly or indirectly: 
Banka Chrissoveloni S.A.R. of Bucharest 
Badische Bank 

The Handels-gesellschaft controlled the majority of Alsatian busi- 
ness through the Allgemeine Elsassisch Bank-gesellschaft. 

The report further stated that the Bank der Deutschen Arbeit con- 
trolled and administered directly or indirectly: 
Ostdeutsche Privatbank A.G. Danzig 
Bank voor Nederlandasche Arbeit N.V. of Amsterdam 
Westbank N.V. (Banque de Travail S.A.) of Brussels 

Branches in Prague, Luxemburg, Metz, Strasbourg and Riga. 

The Reichs Kredit-Gessellschaft controlled and administered directly 
or indirectly the Rumansche Kredit-Bank of Bucharest. 


and the legalistic masks of respectability should be swept 
aside by the property courts with a firm hand. The prop- 
erty of all German functionaries who have enriched them- 
selves during the Nazi regime should be expropriated, and 
if its ownership cannot be traced, it should become part of 
a fund for substituted restitution pari passu to the Nazi's 
victims in conquered territories. This will in some meas- 
ure compensate for the loss of irreplaceable chattels. 

7. Restitution by Labor 

There remains one other form of restitution labor. 
The dissolution of the German Army, Schutzstaffel and 
Sturm-Abteilung groups among others, will affect at 
least four million men. Of these, hundreds of thousands 
will have been sentenced to jail terms by national and in- 
ternational courts. These sentences will range up to life 
imprisonment. Jail sentences should be served in labor 
battalions which will rebuild the devastated areas and help 
in the resettlement of families driven from their homes. 

Care must be taken to prevent too great an importa- 
tion of labor, which may injure the country to be restored, 
just as the flooding of German reparation goods after the 
first World War injured the markets of the creditors. A 
balance must be maintained between the proper assistance 
required in the devastated areas and the unemployment 
problem in the assisted nation. The controls for main- 
taining such an equilibrium will be considered in the eco- 
nomic program to be applied. 

But subject to this limitation, it is obvious justice as 
well as proper penalty that Germany should provide the 
manpower to rehabilitate the territories she has wantonly 
desolated. It was Frederich Froebel, the noted educator 
and founder of the kindergarten system, who said that 
children who destroyed other children's toys should be 


made to replace them with their own. Mere verbal chas- 
tisement is ineffective. The Germans have proceeded on 
the theory that real wealth is labor and they should be 
required to pay partly in that coinage. 

Weighting the Scales of Justice 

In the first World War, almost all of the eight million 
dead were battle field casualties. In the Hitler war, it is 
estimated that four million civilians have been killed by 
ruthless race extermination squads, hostage executions, 
and deliberate terroristic tactics as the Germans advanced. 
No punishment can be deemed fully adequate for the 
wrongs committed. But within the limits of the available 
retributions as prescribed by humanity, and with due re- 
gard for the educational and reform program to be applied 
simultaneously with the penal provisions, these recom- 
mendations have been made. 

For the two objectives must always be kept in mind. 
By forfeiting German sovereignty we punish her and pro- 
tect ourselves, but we promise an end of the probationary 
period and the restoration of Germany as an equal mem- 
ber of the international family, if she reforms. 

To eradicate her military clique down to its very 
roots, we decree capital punishment for the most con- 
scienceless murderers in history. At the same time we free 
the German people from the leadership, subterranean or 
openly avowed, which has encouraged its repeated orgies 
of war lust. 

By restitution in the form of property and labor, we 
return to the victims some of the works ruthlessly stolen 
or destroyed. At the same time, the German people will 
be learning, too. They will learn the simple American 
slogan that crime does not pay. Not only the enforced 


surrender of loot, but the devastation of their own land 
should have some sobering effect. 

These punishment provisions cannot, however, in them- 
selves, either fully protect us or constitute sufficient educa- 
tional deterrents. 

Much more must be done. 




Economic justice will be due all the peoples of the 
earth, whether they be citizens of large and powerful na- 
tions, or small and weak ones; whether they be colonials 
under international supervision awaiting self-determina- 
tion ; whether they be erstwhile enemies ; yes, whether they 
be Nazis or Japanese. The German people may be de- 
prived of sovereignty, but not of food. Their preparation 
for international cooperation must be founded on a healthy 
economy. One cannot educate them to political democracy 
while practicing economic autocracy against them. We 
have seen that economic distress was not the cause of Hit- 
lerism. Deeper, corrupt, super-national phobias drove the 
German people. 

But the community of nations must include the defeated 
peoples on equal terms, in the economic peace or the 
world's economic structure will suffer. 

Such a policy can, however, readily be a prelude to 
another tragedy. On the previous occasion the Germans 
shrewdly exploited our desire for economic justice, to plot 
another war. 

Much can be learned from prior German perfidy. A 
journey through some historical paths will make us 
familiar with the terrain. 


German Industry Plots a War 

Germany declared war upon the world during its 
republican regime. It was economic war, and therefore 
not as shocking or discernible as the subsequent incur- 
sions of panzer troops. But it was deliberate and pur- 
poseful and unscrupulous all trade-marks of German 
efficiency. Its effectiveness was magnified in proportion 
to the unawareness of the "victorious" nations. Even to 
this day few appreciate the cunning of this economic war- 
fare. In military attack, the element of surprise ends 
with the visit of the first bombers. In economic attack, 
the element of deception remains a constant ally. It is as 
subtle as it is deadly. 

As early as 1920, and probably before, the leading 
German chemists and industrialists planned the second 
World War. They had unlimited funds at their disposal, 
hidden in Holland, Switzerland and the United States, in 
the names of citizens of those countries. And they rightly 
calculated that foreign investors would pour money into 
Germany if it feigned inability to pay reparations. 

Many of the German patents were seized in Britain 
and the United States during the first World War. But 
the Germans were little affected by this because they had 
never properly revealed their patents, though this is re- 
quired by international and national patent laws. Thus, 
when, to cure syphilis, the United States attempted to 
manufacture salvarsan from the German patent, it dis- 
covered all too late that the formula was defective. Many 
soldiers were poisoned. We had a similar experience 
when we tried to make synthetic nitrates for explosives. 

These German industrialists and chemists planned 
Der Tag with their own weapons. Having a monopoly 
of synthetic nitrogen, they planned to infiltrate into 
foreign industry an economic fifth column which would 


seize control of war industries. Karl Duisberg, the chief 
chemist of the German Bayer Company, had prolonged 
the first World War by his development of ersatz food 
and clothes. Karl Bosch, chief chemist of the Badische 
Anilin-und-Soda Fabrik, had invented chlorine poison gas, 
snrpalite and yperite. Fritz Haber, head of the Kaiser 
Wilhelm Institut, had discovered how to take nitrogen 
out of the air. Synthetic nitrogen had served for both 
explosives and fertilizer. These three veterans of the first 
World War, together with many younger adherents, 
plotted to recapture the dye and pharmaceutical markets. 
The first step was to merge every important chemical firm 
in Germany into one huge trust. The Germans with their 
craving for polysyllabic names called it the "Interessenge- 
meinschaft Farbenindustrie Aktien Gesellschaft". Then 
branches were established throughout the world. It was 
known in the United States as the I. G. Farben. In other 
countries it bore other names. But it is no exaggeration 
to say that this enormous enterprise, which obtained con- 
trol of vital industries throughout the world, and acted 
at the same time as the espionage center for the German 
military clique, was as instrumental in conquering Europe 
as the German army. And it antedated Hitler's ascent 
by fourteen years. 

Karl Duisberg became chairman of the Board of I. G. 
Farben, Karl Bosch, its President. It encompassed not 
only the chemical industries but also the heavy indus- 
tries, such as steel and munitions. Therefore it included 
representation of Adolf Kirdorf, czar of the German Coal 
Trust, Krupp von Bohlen, Fritz Thyssen, Hjalmar Schacht, 
Hugo Stinnes, Albert Voegler, director general of the 
United Steel Works, and many others. The I. G. Farben 
in a short while regained control of its former impressive 
holdings in the United States. As it extended its Ameri- 
can interests, it combined its various activities under the 


innocuous name of the American I. G. Chemical Corpo- 
ration. This later became known as the General Aniline 
and Film Corporation. 

The German industrialists planned not only to make 
Germany self-sufficient for war, but also to prevent foreign 
preparation, through extending their control into foreign 
countries. They planned, if and when this work was com- 
pleted, to destroy the German Kepublic and select some 
suitable leader to execute their plans for world conquest. 
Hitler was not even dreamed of as the Fuehrer ; and if he 
had been proposed to the conspirators during this period, 
he would undoubtedly have been scorned as a stupid and 
neurotic scamp. It was only later, when his exciting 
demagoguery, combined with the requisite gangsterlike un- 
scrupulousness, had built a following, that he was financed 
for bigger deeds. In the early stages of the industrial 
and military conspiracy against civilization, Hitler was 
ranting in a beer hall against big business and corpora- 
tions, and demanding National Socialism. He was later 
to be lifted by industrialists to a position of power, where 
he could give vent to German aspiration for world con- 
quest. He inherited a war machine. He did not build it. 

Those who did build it combined arms preparation 
with economic conquest. 

The Versailles Peace Treaty had fixed the German 
Army at no more than 100,000 officers and men. The 
theory of this limitation was that such a force might be 
necessary to preserve internal order. 

But German bad faith took immediate command. 
Krupp and Thyssen financed the Free Corps, the nucleus 
of the army which was to conquer Europe. This was being 
done in the very days of the German Republic. The in- 
dustrial barons provided funds to von Schleicher, who or- 
ganized the Black Reichswehr. It trained in secrecy. 
They also financed Major Duesterberg, who organized the 


Stahlhelm (Steel Helmets), the veterans of the first 
World War. Von Schleicher became the financial conduit 
for the Free Corps and its notorious leaders, Captains 
Ehrhart and Schlageter. Those in the government who 
would not join the conspiracy were terrorized. Chancellor 
Friederich Ebert's liberal Minister of Finance, Mathias 
Erzberger, leader of the Catholic Center Party, was assas- 
sinated by the Free Corps. This Nazi method likewise 
preceded the Nazis and Hitler. 

Professor Major General Karl E. Nikolas Haushofer, 
as early as 1925, was expounding the geopolitics of world 
hegemony to the officers of the Black Reichswehr. The 
development of a skilled general staff trained in newer 
technique could be carried on secretly. But how was a 
huge army to be trained in secret? The answer was the 
sport camps and recreational centers throughout Ger- 
many. The entire youth of Germany suddenly became 
interested in physical culture and long hikes. Aviation 
training was achieved through glider clubs. Thus the 
prohibition against the construction of military planes 
was circumvented. All this, too, preceded Hitler and the 

Dr. Karl Joseph Wirth, new leader of the Catholic Cen- 
ter Party and Chancellor of the Weimar Republic, boasted 
openly that the real foundation for the German rearm- 
ament had been already laid in the beginning of the 
Weimar Republic and that Hitler only completed the work 
which had been started: 

"As to the rearmament of Germany, Hitler has only 
continued the rearmament that had been prepared by the 
Weimar Republic. I, myself, deserve great credit for this 
preparation . . . The great difficulty was that our military 
efforts had to be kept secret from the Allies. I, therefore, 
always had to appear polite and harmless . . . When Hitler 


came to power he no longer needed to concern himself 
with the quality of the German Army but only with the 
quantity. The real reorganization was our work." (Lu- 
cerne Daily News, August 9, 1937) 

The Axis Is Founded Long Before Hitler 

In 1928 Germany successfully invaded the Orient in 
its economic war. An agreement was entered into with 
the Japanese government to take over its chemical indus- 
try and train the Japanese in the manufacture of explo- 
sives and light metals. Poison gases were included, and 
under the tutelage of an I. G. Farben chemist were, and 
are still, being manufactured at the Sumitomo Chemical 
Co. plant at Wihima. Full agreement was also reached 
with Japan concerning synthetic nitrogen, which involved 
licenses to the Japanese trusts of Mitsui and Mitsubishi. 
The Axis was forming long before Hitler. 

In 1931 Mussolini desired a great Italian chemical 
industry for war purposes. He needed the Farben pat- 
ents and secret formulae. He was readily induced to 
force the Italian firm of Montecatini to join the Farben 
monopoly. This was achieved by the organization of the 
Agenzia Chimiche Nazionali Associati to manufacture 
all dyes, heavy chemicals and aluminum for Italy. Farben 
took 49 per cent of the stock. Montecatini received 51 per 
cent. But this was a typical German illusion. Actually 
Germany dominated this company through its patent con- 
trol. Italian industry had become just another plant for 
I. G. Farben. It is to be noted again that this took place 
in 1931. The Italian-German Axis was really formed 
through economic arrangements prior to Hitler's ascent. 
The purpose was preparation for war. 

The reticent Karl Duisberg could not restrain his sense 
of triumph. In a public speech in Munich on March 26, 


1931, he said : "Only a solid economic block from Odessa 
to Bordeaux will give Europe that economic backbone 
which it needs in order to maintain its position in the 

Had the French government noticed the word "Bor- 
deaux" or the Eussian government the word "Odessa", 
they would have known the Germans' ultimate goal. 

By 1932 I. G. Farben substantially controlled im- 
portant European industry. Chiefly by means of price- 
cutting policies the outstanding French firm, Etablisse- 
ments Kuhlmann, was forced into alignment with I. G. 
Farben in 1927. In 1929 I. G. Farben obtained con- 
trol of the three largest chemical companies in Switz- 
erland the Ciba, the Gergy and the Sandoz companies. 
It proportioned the manufacture of certain chemicals 
among its international subsidiaries. Dyes were to be 
made 5% by Switzerland, 5% by Italy, 8% by France 
and 82% by Germany. The English chemical industry, too, 
was forced to make market arrangements with I. G. 
Farben. Similar control was obtained of the manufacture 
of nitrogen. France and Chile, Germany's chief competi- 
tors in this field, acquiesced (through a cartel) in quota 
restrictions which favored Germany. 

The attorney and representative of I. G. Farben in 
France was Pierre Laval ! 

The Americas Are Invaded 

I. G. Farben acquired 50% of the stock of the Grasselli 
Dyestuff Corporation, the American company which had 
obtained the I. G. Farben patents from the Federal Alien 
Property Custodian. Soon Farben owned 100% of this 
company. It had recaptured its patents. Then it changed 
the Grasselli Company into the General Aniline and Film 
Corporation. Similarly the American Bayer Company, 


which had acquired the German Bayer patents from the 
Alien Property Custodian, was absorbed and made an I. G. 
Farben unit in the Sterling Products Corporation. These 
companies were the main suppliers of the pharmaceutical 
markets throughout Latin America. They were now in 
German hands. 

The infiltration of vital American industries continued, 
all this within five years after Germany's defeat and 
when she was "unable" to pay reparations. 

I. G. Farben had owned a substantial share of stock 
in the Ford plant at Cologne, Germany. Edsel Ford owned 
shares in the I. G. Farben organization (General Aniline 
and Film Corp. ) in the United States. He became a direc- 
tor of this company. This association, while innocent so 
far as Ford was concerned, resulted in such anomalous 
by-products as Fritz Kuhn, later the leader of the Nazi 
Bund in the United States, being employed in this country 
as a chemist in the Ford motor plant; Henry Ford receiv- 
ing a Nazi medal; and his refusal to manufacture air- 
plane motors for England. 

Holding forth its patents for the manufacture of syn- 
thetic gasoline as bait, I. G. Farben formed an association 
with the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey. This was 
achieved through the medium of a new corporation called 
Standard I. G. Company. Thereafter this company ac- 
quired the International Hydrogenation Patents Company 
Ltd., which controlled synthetic oil patents throughout 
the rest of the world. Walter C. Teagle, Chairman of the 
Board of Directors of the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, 
became a director of General Aniline and Film Corpora- 
tion. The annual business of General Aniline in the 
United States alone exceeded ? 40,000,000. 

German patent control through cartels extended to 
vital and new materials essential to war. Under patent 


arrangements with German firms, American companies 
were obliged to exchange information. Thus we find that 
important secrets concerning the production of synthetic 
rubber were revealed by American concerns to Nazi Ger- 
many, although they were concealed from the U. S. Navy 
Department. And as late as Pearl Harbor, royalties on 
aviation gasoline sold to the R. A. F. were put aside to be 
paid to I. G. Farben after the war. 

Strategic new materials were concealed from our 
country. When a Nazi armored car was captured, chem- 
ists discovered that it had been constructed from an 
unknown metal alloy, lighter than aluminum and stronger 
than steel. Only then did it become plain how Nazi 
motorized forces had been able to extend their radius of 
activities "abnormally". This and other alloys were made 
from magnesium and beryllium. Beryllium is the most 
remarkable of the light metals and cheap to produce. It is 
lighter and stronger than magnesium. In the United 
States, production of light metals was limited almost en- 
tirely to aluminum. Yet magnesium is 50 per cent lighter 
than aluminum, and aluminum is only one-third as heavy 
as steel. 

At the beginning of the second World War, Germany 
was producing almost three quarters of the world's entire 
output of magnesium. This was four times what the 
United States produced, even though Germany had to pro 
duce this metal from by-products, whereas our country had 
better access to the natural raw material. How was the 
German predominance obtained? By patent monopolies 
which prevented or curbed the expansion of such new in- 
dustries in the United States. 

Mr. Andrew J. Gahagan, president of the Beryllium 
Corporation of Pennsylvania, testified before the Truman 
Committee of the United States Senate that his company, 
which had through independent research attempted to de- 


velop this metal, found a basic patent in a little known 
corporation called Metal and Thermit Corporation. He 
approached his "competitor" for a license. After three 
years of negotiation, he discovered that it did not really 
control the patent. Bather, it was owned by Siemens und 
Halske, Germany's biggest electro-technical concern. 
Gahagan went to Berlin and obtained a license, but under 
such terms that the manufacture of beryllium in the 
United States was limited to insignificant quantities. 

In the same manner, international cartels gave Ger- 
many advantages in the plastic field. It is not yet clear to 
what extent plastics will replace iron, steel, cement and 
wood. But many have predicted that we are about to 
emerge industrially into the "plastic" era. Certain it is 
that plastics have in many instances qualities superior to 
wood, glass, porcelain, and other materials. Moreover, it 
becomes possible to replace complicated machine-tool work 
with simplified casting. Germany held basic patents for 
plastics of strategic military importance and issued li- 
censes in such a manner as to limit foreign production. 
Monopoly, through cartel, was exploited to tempt Ameri- 
can firms into these arrangements. For example, Plexiglas 
is a new material with almost miraculous qualities. It is 
a glasslike plastic but it does not splinter. It can be sawed 
or carved like wood and can be treated like soft metal. Its 
suitability for cockpit enclosures, transparent bomber 
noses, gun turrets and windshields is obvious. It increases 
the efficiency and safety of military planes. 

When the war began, German planes were already 
equipped with this material. The German firm of Kohm 
and Haas A. G. held the basic patents. Subsequent evi- 
dence before the Truman Committee revealed that there 
was only one company in the United States producing this 
strategic material. It was Rohm and Haas, Inc., of Phila- 
delphia. The German and American firms had a world 


monopoly on Plexiglas. By agreement between them, the 
German firm was not permitted to sell in the United 
States, but had the exclusive market for Europe, Africa 
and Asia (excluding Japan). While the German firm 
could not sell Plexiglas to the United States, it could sell 
finished articles made of Plexiglas anywhere. In 1936 
Imperial Chemical Industries of Great Britain received a 
license under similar conditions. 

I. G. Farben had a special agreement with Kohm and 
Haas, Inc., whereby Farben agreed not to manufacture any 
product similar to Plexiglas, while Kohm and Haas agreed 
not to use their patents for articles which would be com- 
petitive with Farben. The base of Plexiglas is methyl 
methacrylate, a synthetic product, which can also be 
utilized for production of artificial rubber, dyestuffs and 
pharmaceutical articles. Thus, by virtue of the restrictive 
arrangements concerning Plexiglas, Germany also limited 
foreign production of artificial rubber and other war mate- 

When the American government purchased Plexiglas, a 
royalty of three per cent was paid to the German com- 
pany. Koyalties for sales to Kusia were ten per cent. 

Even after the war began in 1939, Germany continued 
to do "business as usual" with Plexiglas. It arranged for 
the American company to serve Germany's markets and 
pay over the profits, minus an appropriate service charge. 
The agreement expressly provided that "at the time when 
we will be able again to sell to the aforementioned coun- 
tries you will let us have copies of all bills, price arrange- 
ments, etc. which are necessary for us in order to get back 
into business again." 

Industry and Espionage 

Thus, irrespective of the outcome of the war, Germany 
was planning a new start not merely a commercial start, 


but the control of strategic military materials for the next 
effort at world domination. One cannot study the tactics 
of Germany's economic war without the overwhelming con- 
viction that she intends a continuity of effort until Der 
Tag is achieved. Defeats are philosophically considered 
merely the hard task-master by which experience and in- 
formation are obtained for the ultimate successful effort. 

Royalties were paid on Plexiglas to the German firm 
even after enactment of the Lend-Lease Act. The reports 
on sales to the United States and Canada served of course 
as an easy index for the Luftwaffe as to the progress of the 
manufacture of military airplanes in the United States. 

I. G. Farben did not consider itself merely a great com- 
mercial empire. It was part and parcel of the German 
military conspiracy. Its representatives in the United 
States became citizens here, and were surrounded socially 
and otherwise with domestic respectability. This fitted 
them all the better to become the espionage agents of Ger- 
many. The F.B.I, struggled to uncover the sources of the 
huge sums of money which flooded the United States and 
South America with subversive propaganda. In 1934 Con- 
gress fell upon a clue. In the course of an investigation 
concerning Ivy Lee, a noted lobbyist, it was discovered 
that he was on the payroll of I. G. Farben at a salary of 
f 25,000 a year plus expenses. As part of his employment, 
Lee had visited Germany and received direct instructions 
from Goebbels. He spent millions of dollars in the United 
States to spread Nazi propaganda. In this country, Lee 
was paid through General Aniline, the Farben subsidiary. 
Some payments came through the Farben holding company 
of Switzerland I. G. Chemie. 

Every fifth-column agitator in the United States, no 
matter how ignorant or low his estate, lived in comfort, 
if not in luxury. Funds for scurrilous publications were 
never lacking. The William Dudley Pelleys, the Joe Mc- 


Williams, the Deatheridges, and other of their ilk pros- 
pered. I. G. Farben was the financial arsenal of Fascism. 

Finally, in the fall of 1941 Federal authorities com- 
pleted their studies of the activities of Farben officials who 
hid behind their American citizenship. A criminal indict- 
ment was obtained against W. E. Weiss, a director of Gen- 
eral Aniline and chairman of the board of that other 
Farben subsidiary, Sterling Products. Also indicted were 
A. E. Diebold of Sterling Products and a host of others, 
leading figures in I. G. Farben. The charge was criminal 
conspiracy. But Sterling Products succeeded in obtain- 
ing a consent decree which dissolved the agreement be- 
tween Sterling and I. G. Farben. The defendants were 
fined a mere $26,000. An indictment was also obtained 
against Kudolf Ilgner, one of the founders of American 
Aniline, a brother of Max Ilgner of the Berlin office of 
I. G. Farben. The charges involved the control of nitrogen 
and other vital chemicals used in the manufacture of high 
explosives and munitions in the United States. WTiile the 
F.B.I, was pursuing its investigation, Ilgner ordered the 
destruction of all his records which related to Farben 
patents and royalties. He brazenly pleaded guilty to 
ordering these records burned and was fined f 1000 ! 

In 1941 disclosures of Farben arrangements with 
Standard Oil Company, whereby the world was allocated 
into exclusive spheres for the use of synthetic oil patents, 
caused little public excitement. Synthetic rubber patents 
were also controlled by these two companies acting 
through a subsidiary called Jasco, Inc. The Goodyear and 
Goodrich Companies were stymied in their endeavor to 
provide a synthetic rubber industry for national defense. 
Even after Pearl Harbor, these companies could not ob- 
tain licenses to use the Farben patents held by Jasco. Thus 
the Nazis, through their American affiliate, reached into 


the United States to prevent the production of rubber 
while the Japs took the natural sources from us. 

Although Great Britain, Belgium and Holland con- 
fiscated Farben assets after the war began, the pretense 
was long maintained in the United States that Parben was 
an "American" enterprise owned either by Americans or 
the neutral Swiss. Finally in October, 1941, President 
Roosevelt intervened, and named Judge John E. Mack 
president of General Aniline, replacing Dietrich A. 
Schmitz ; and William C. Bullitt was appointed Chairman 
of the Board to replace Wilhelm von Bath. In December, 
1941, the Treasury agents took over complete supervision. 
Three days later, Federal indictments were handed down 
against the Farben companies and their officials for crim- 
inal practices which allegedly had commenced in May, 
1924. In February, 1942, Secretary of the Treasury Mor- 
genthau took over 97 per cent of the Farben stock and thus 
stopped the flow of money through subterranean channels 
to Germany, and the equally dangerous financing of vicious 
Nazi propaganda in this hemisphere. For Farben's activ- 
ities were not limited to the United States. At the Latin- 
American conference in Bio de Janeiro in January, 1941, 
it was revealed that Farben representatives had combined 
economic power and bold espionage with deadly effective- 

In Ecuador, the Farben firm of Brueckmann & Co. of 
Guayaquil, was headed by L. E. Brueckmann, the Nazi 
consul. Several Nazi consular employees were Farben 
representatives! The manager of Brueckmann's, Herr 
Tetke and the treasurer, Herr Keperti, were the leading 
Nazis in Ecuador. 

The chief center of Nazi activities in Brazil were the 
Farben firms of Allianca Commercial de Anilinas Ltda., 
and A. Quimica Bayer of Bio de Janeiro. Herr Hammers 


was a ranking executive of Farben and a high member of 
the Nazi secret service. Two other Farben-Nazi secret 
service men were Herr Burmeister and Max Hahne. 

In Chile the Farben-Nazi chiefs were Werner Siering, 
Nazi Party secretary, who organized the Nazi intelligence 
service in Chile. 

In Peru, two Nazi secret service men were executives 
of the Farben Compania General de Anilinas. 

In Mexico, the Farben chief executive was Baron von 
Humboldt, who represented the Gestapo in that country. 
Farben maintained three leading firms in Mexico, which 
were supplied by General Aniline and Sterling Products 
from New York. 

Similarly, Farben's commercial and political power 
were predominant in Colombia, adjacent to the Panama 
Canal, and in other Latin American countries. 

The Cartel, a Secret Weapon 

Nor was I. G. Farben the only industrial giant to serve 
the German "mission". Another typical illustration of 
world control through cartel monopoly is afforded in mili- 
tary optical equipment. The Zeiss works in Germany are 
the world's largest manufacturers of this essential war ma- 
terial. Careful steps were taken to prevent American skill 
from developing in this field. Bausch & Lomb, also Ger- 
man, became Zeiss' exclusive agent in the United States. 
Zeiss bought into this American firm. Then came the first 
World War and the country was in such dire need of 
military optical instruments that appeals were made to the 
public for binoculars and other instruments. Under the 
guidance of the Bureau of Standards, Bausch & Lomb and 
other companies were encouraged to produce optical glass. 

Despite this experience, when the war was ended, this 
field was left to Bausch & Lomb, and that company in 1921 


signed a 21-year contract with Zeiss. Thereby, Bausch & 
Lomb obtained the United States as exclusive territory 
for the manufacture and sale of military instruments. 
Zeiss received the rest of the world. Bausch & Lomb paid 
7 per cent royalty to Zeiss on all goods sold by it. Once 
again, the iniquitous feature of an innocent royalty pay- 
ment was that it enabled Germany to know exactly what 
kinds of equipment and in what quantity the United States 
was buying. 

In 1935, Bausch & Lomb refused contracts with Britain 
and France for $1,500,000 worth of military instruments. 

Pains were taken to limit American output. Although 
in 1918 Bausch & Lomb had produced 480,000 pounds of 
optical glass, in 1940 it produced only 200,000 pounds. Its 
remaining needs were filled by Zeiss. In other words, 
Germany controlled the American supply, through its car- 
tel arrangement with Bausch & Lomb. 

Another illustration involves the Krupp works in Ger- 
many. Tungsten carbide gives greater cutting power to 
machine tools. It is called the martial diamond. In 1928, 
the General Electric and Krupp pooled their patents on 
this material. In 1936 they entered into a further agree- 
ment, which gave General Electric exclusive control of the 
United States market, and Krupp, the rest of the world. 
General Electric agreed it would grant no further licenses 
to manufacture tungsten carbide without Krupp's 

The importance of this limitation may be gleaned from 
the fact that in many machining operations tungsten car- 
bide increases the rate of production 500 per cent. Yet in 
1938 Germany had twenty times as much tungsten carbide 
in use as the United States. 

One of the reasons for our small production was Gen- 
eral Electric's monopoly in this country, which permitted 
it to limit production and fix prices without competition. 


Thus, when Krupp's price was $90.60 a pound, General 
Electric's was $407.70. When Krupp's price was $37.14, 
General Electric's was $199.32. 

When the second World War came, Germany, previ- 
ously defeated, had succeeded in depriving the United 
States of the large-scale use of the martial diamond. 

These are not isolated instances of German scheming, 
aided by American firms bribed by the grant of monopoly. 
They were part and parcel of a deliberate German pro- 
gram which was applied to aluminum, synthetic rubber, 
quinine, atabrine and other important chemicals and 

During the first World War the United States seized 
12,000 German patents. Almost all of them illegally secre- 
ted essential information, so that they were not genuine 
patents. American ingenuity, which had been too long 
under-estimated, found its own way. But Germany later 
either directly reacquired its patents, or regained control 
of them through cartel agreements. 

Thus, in almost every instance where there was a cartel, 
there was a military shortage in 1942. 

American firms, whatever their financial ambitions, oper- 
ated independently and not pursuant to governmental di- 
rection. Indeed, very recently Vice-President Wallace 
issued a statement on behalf of Ralph W. Gallagher, presi- 
dent of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, after 
the latter's visit to him, to the effect that there should be 
no international cartels which hold prices above competi- 
tive levels; that all international agreements should be 
filed with the Federal government; that there should be 
unrestricted licensing of patents at reasonable royalties; 
and "that cartels which limit production, fix prices, divide 
territory and limit technological developments are against 
public policy and are inconsistent with our principles of 


free enterprise." This is the enlightened voice of American 
business as it is heard today. 

The German firms, however, were instruments of the 
State and their goal was ultimate military domination. 

A Fifty Billion Dollar Haul 

This discussion of German enterprises will aid in 
grasping the elusive fact that German industry planned 
and plotted with the army a military attack upon the 
world. Their "vision" included the looting of Europe. 
Both the war and the consequent international robbery 
were achieved. 

The Nazi army was probably the only one in the world 
which had special economic units working in co-ordination 
with its General Staff. Their function was to obtain re- 
sources for the prosecution of the war. They were special 
units of the army, scientifically trained in looting. This 
department was called Wehrwirtschafts und Ruestungsamt 
im Oberkommando der Wehrmacht or War Economy and 
Armament Board of the High Command of the Armed 
Forces, abbreviated to WiRil. In preparation for the in- 
vasion of Poland the WiRil conducted an experiment on 
an area in the Saar. The entire civilian population was 
evacuated in a few hours. Then, in the abandoned vil- 
lages and towns, units of the War Economy Staff entered 
with trucks and tools. Trained mechanics dismantled 
machine tools and other industrial machinery, while mili- 
tary clerks made detailed inventory and tagged each ob- 
ject. Three thousand railroad cars carried everything to 
another location in the east. This was a preview of Ger- 
many's subsequent program. 

The Board of Economic Warfare of the United States 
reports that the Germans have plundered Europe at the 
rate of ten billion dollars a year. There has been a system- 


atic removal of machinery, food, war material and cloth- 
ing. The looting has extended from entire industries down 
to garden tools and door hinges. Little has been left un- 
touched. Laboratory and scientific equipment from Eu- 
rope's greatest research institutes have been moved to 
Germany. Horses, cattle, sheep and pigs have been con- 
fiscated. Public galleries and private collections have 
been stripped of art objects. 

On April 25, 1941, the German High Command an- 
nounced that 872 ships totalling some two million tons 
had been seized in occupied harbors. 

In Poland alone, public property valued at $2,900,- 
000,000 was confiscated. 

From France, the Germans acquired enough steel scrap 
to cover their normal requirements for three and a half 
years, plus oil reserves, copper, nickel, food, soap, shoes, 
clothing, paper, razor blades and even toothpaste. 

Trains commandeered to haul the loot were not re- 
turned. From Czechoslovakia alone, the Germans got 
more than $1,500,000,000 worth of military equipment. 
They stole even the stocks of laundry in military hospitals. 
Booty from Austria and Czechoslovakia was sent to south- 
eastern Europe in exchange for foodstuffs and raw mate- 
rials. Then these countries were invaded and the same 
equipment was recaptured. 

By the end of 1941 German robbery amounted to at 
least 36 billion dollars ! In 1943 it exceeded 50 billion dol- 
lars. Naples and Rome are recent additions to a record 
of theft never equalled in all history. 

Title By Hold-Up 

Nor was this all. Having learned, as we shall soon 
see, how to avoid reparation payments, the Germans knew 
how to collect them. They levied "occupation costs" upon 


France, payable at the rate of 400,000,000 francs a day. 
Germany's actual occupation costs were 125,000,000 francs 
a day. Germany used the balance of 275,000,000 francs a 
day to "buy" at forced sale prices, every important indus- 
trial plant in France. 

In the first instance the fund to meet these occupation 
costs was provided by credits advanced by the Bank of 
France. But as the Germans used the money to buy 
French securities and property, the former French owners, 
having no other outlet for the funds, invested them in 
Government bonds. This in turn enabled the Vichy gov- 
ernment to make renewed payments to Germany. By 
means of this Machiavellian cycle, France was despoiled 
of real wealth and forced deeper into currency inflation. 

In conquered territories, soldiers' banks were estab- 
lished (Soldatenbanken). They were provided with spe- 
cial army promissory notes called Reichskredit Kassen- 
scheme or Reich Credit Office Notes, printed without any 
backing. They were valid only in the country of issue. 
Reichskredit notes issued for Belgium had no value in 
France or even in Germany. The German authorities 
fixed an arbitrary rate of exchange between these oc- 
cupation marks and the currency of the occupied coun- 
try. As soon as a complete inventory of stock piles 
and assets had been made by the WiRu (until then all 
commercial transactions were prohibited without the con- 
sent of the military authorities), the Reichskredit notes 
would be declared legal tender. Local banks were com- 
pelled to accept them for local currency at the fixed rate. 
Thus, when a German bought something in a French 
shop with these marks, the owner exchanged them at his 
regular bank for their corresponding value in francs. The 
bank then exchanged these occupation notes for national 
currency at the branches of the Bank of France. It, too, 
was compelled to accept them. Since it could neither con- 


vert these notes into German currency, nor use them in 
any other country, the Bank of France was forced to ac- 
cumulate them. They merely represented a growing debt 
of the French government. Germany's debt, represented 
by these notes, was thus transformed into France's debt. 
In this way "purchases" were nothing but confiscation. 
The goods went to Germany. The responsibility for pay- 
ment remained that of the occupied country. Due to the 
fixing of artificial exchange rates, the Germans even cre- 
ated the illusion that they were paying high prices. 

By these devices, Germany acquired, immediately after 
occupation, two million tons of oil reserves in France 
and Belgium, 300,000 tons of potatoes from Norway, 
$10,000,000 worth of Danish bacon, butter and egg stocks 
earmarked for the British market, and nine-tenths of Den- 
mark's own butter reserves; 2,000,000 tons of wheat re- 
serves (excluding France). From France alone the 
Germans took food worth upwards of $900,000,000 and 
$800,000,000 worth of machinery, textiles, metals, oil, 
even feather-beds and kitchen spices. Every conquered 
nation was stripped of its food stuffs, minerals, manu- 
factured goods, and even of its industrial and commercial 
enterprises. Furthermore, the national banks of the occu- 
pied countries were compelled to issue more currency with 
no other backing than the worthless German occupation 
notes which they held in huge quantities. The result was 
large-scale inflation, so that ultimately the local shop- 
keeper had not only parted with his goods, but was unable 
to buy anything with the inflated money he had received. 

Every 41 days Germany collected mostly in goods 
a sum equal to the one it was supposed to pay after the 
first war as total reparation each year for World War 
damages. Compared with the four and a half billion dol- 
lars which Germany exacted each year from occupied 


countries, the $234,000,000 it was finally asked to pay as 
reparations under the Young Plan was a drop in the 

When the time for restitution comes we must under- 
stand that Germany did not simply steal and loot. The 
appearance of legal title by "purchase" was deliberately 
created, for the Germans have always anticipated that 
their effort at world domination may fail. To hedge 
against defeat and prepare for another campaign, they 
have deliberately given the appearance of legality to much 
of their pillage. 

The Business High Command 

It is difficult to unravel the complex factors of German 
scheming, and determine whether the industrial monarchs 
of Germany contributed more than the Military High 
Command to Germany's emergence from defeat to another 
attack upon a peace-hungry world. Neither could have 
acted without the other. Armies must be financed. Other 
nations must be weakened by military insufficiency and 
divisive propaganda. The insatiable German lust for 
world domination pervaded its business lords no less than 
its military clique. Significantly enough, the plans for 
war were hatched and developed long before the appropri- 
ate Nazi fanatics and madmen rose to give them hysterical 
throat service. 

Therefore in planning a just economy for Germany, 
special attention must be given to the unique aspirations 
of the German businessman. He seeks more than success 
and prosperity. He considers himself an agent of Ger- 
man destiny. He believes German inventiveness must be 
utilized as a military weapon. He is a conspirator, not 
an entrepreneur, and any unethical business practices of 
jhis competitors in other countries pale into triviality when 


compared with his program for slaughter and world booty. 
There was totalitarian preparation for war in Germany 
long before there was totalitarian war. 

Just as the German High Command must be eradi- 
cated so that it may not breed new military plans; just 
as the munitions and "heavy" industries must be eradi- 
cated so that they will not secretly again spawn the 
weapons of annihilation; so the German international 
"business" infiltrations which, through cartels and control 
of strategic military materials, constitute an economic 
fifth column lending its innocent facade to espionage and 
sabotage, must be destroyed forever. Any plan for eco- 
nomic justice which ignores these realities will be as futile 
as the disarmament clauses of the Versailles Treaty. Ger- 
man good faith must be entirely discounted. The power 
to practice bad faith must be annihilated. 

Before suggesting an affirmative program for German 
economic reconstruction with proper safeguards, another 
historical journey will be instructive. It is into the financial 
and monetary realms, closely allied with economic plan- 

The Reparations Fraud 

To this day, Germany claims that she paid 31,875 mil- 
lion dollars in reparations. At various times even Allied 
experts accepted this estimate. Actually Germany paid 
4,671 million dollars. The difference is accounted for by 
Dr. Schacht's fraud in treating military losses as if they 
were reparations. Thus he valued German colonies lost in 
the war at 22.5 billion dollars. He added German state 
property in the ceded territories, such as railway stations, 
school buildings, government offices and highways. Ger- 
many even included in "reparation payments" the cost of 
German disarmament, the destruction of German 


fortresses and the transformation of German industry 
from war to peace production. Obviously this is a farcical 
accounting procedure. The losses of the beaten aggressor 
were claimed to be "reparations"! 

It is true that Germany suffered from a severe infla- 
tion. One dollar was equal to 4,200,000 marks. Never- 
theless, the fact is that between 1924 and 1939 Germany's 
real income was higher than in the years preceding the 
war. The individual German was earning more in those 
"years of want" than in the palmy days under William II. 

Germany received in loans and credits from the Allies, 
her "conquerors," 6,750 million dollars, a sum far in ex- 
cess of what she ever paid. Yet during the very period of 
these loans, while Germany's national income was 77 per 
cent higher than in 1913, the Allies cancelled 17,100 mil- 
lion dollars of German indebtedness, because of her alleged 

In consideration of these huge cancellations Germany 
agreed to cease its constant plea for relief and to pay an- 
nually |234,000,000 less than half of the Dawes Plan's 
"normal" payments. Nevertheless within a year Hinden- 
burg again appealed to President Hoover for relief and a 
year's moratorium was granted. The next year reparation 
payments were simply cancelled. 

The commercial loans fared no better. Germany re- 
ceived 5,355 million dollars in cash and Hitler simply 
kept it. Kept it? Actually these funds were utilized to 
build another military machine. 

The Allies were incredibly duped. Due to inflation in 
1923, Germany's internal debt became practically non- 
existent while Great Britain carried an internal debt of 
31.5 billion dollars, and France, 250 billion francs, all this 
apart from some 8,625 million dollars of war debts which 
these two countries owed to the United States. 


The victorious nations suffered under their obligations 
while the vanquished obtained cancellations, loans and in- 
vestments with which a new military machine was built. 
Germany not only had the advantage of surreptitious mili- 
tary construction under the guise of poverty, but the Allies, 
while financing Germany, were actually unable to finance 
their own armament program. Such is Germany's record 
of cunning, deceit, and ruthlessness in the financial realm. 
This financial skullduggery must not be repeated. 

Of greater value than the monetary study in charting 
our future course is an analysis of the reparation payments 
in merchandise. Two main economic theories of reparation 
existed after the last war. One was held by the French, 
who insisted that Germany's failure to pay in gold was 
due to bad faith and that sufficient pressure would compel 
the Germans to pay. The other theory, advocated by the 
English under the guidance of Professor John Maynard 
Keynes' "dynamic solution," urged that German industry 
be rehabilitated by the grant of large loans. This would 
enable her to buy raw materials and modernize her pro- 
duction equipment. Only a prosperous Germany, it was 
argued, would be able to pay the reparations. 

A compromise between the two theories was adopted. 
Under the Dawes Plan a loan of 800 million gold marks 
was made to the Reichsbank, secured by a mortgage on the 
German National Railways and certain taxes. Germany 
was thereafter to pay her reparations bill at the rate of 
one billion gold marks a year, increasing to two and a half 
billion in the fifth year. These payments, however, were 
to be paid in part in manufactured goods or raw materials. 

Germany immediately flooded the world markets with 
goods. The Allied nations raised their trade barriers to 
keep out the competing German goods. Germany refused 
to be thus restrained. She resorted to dumping and sim- 
ilar methods, thereby forcing a further revision in the 


reparation payments. The Young Plan followed, again 
substantially reducing Germany's payments, but requir- 
ing that they be made in gold, not in merchandise. 

Germany accepted the reduction but did not make the 
required cash payments. Instead, she stopped all payments 
of interest and principal on foreign loans, and simul- 
taneously increased her exports by dumping. The cur- 
rency and gold which she thereby acquired were not used 
to pay reparations but were used to aid the rearmament 

During the playing of this financial farce Germany en- 
gaged in ceaseless propaganda to the effect that without 
access to raw materials she could not live. Actually, her 
imports of raw materials far exceeded the pre-war rate 
and for a smaller population. But they were absorbed by 
armaments secretly being constructed. This propaganda 
was amazingly effective with neutral nations and even 
with former Allies. The Hoover moratorium was a typical 

These historical references are not merely recrimina- 
tions. The same economic theories which led the experts 
to their previous conclusions are still in favor in many 
high quarters. The awareness of German deception may 
be keener, but traditional beliefs concerning patents, trade, 
tariffs, and reparations still persist. The lure of sympathy 
for the masses of "innocent" Germans is not inconsider- 
able. Nor will our resistive capacity be made firmer by the 
numerous German organizations which will no doubt 
assure us with all the emphasis of breast-beating that they 
were always oppressed democrats performing the Nazi will 
under compulsion. Victims of Hitlerism will gain author- 
ity by their service in concentration camps, and undoubt- 
edly many of them will be sincere. But behind this facade 
will be plotters against world peace, whose reform and 
democratic evangelism are only disguises to be worn until 


the next drive for conquest. There must not be another. 
For we must steel ourselves on the economic front as well 
as on the political front, and extirpate the power to do 
evil by methods which, though drastic, are imperative. 

Economic Disarmament 

It will not be sufficient to destroy the military caste. 
Another can quickly arise. Germany's capacity to build 
the tools for another war-machine must be permanently 
removed. There must be complete industrial disarmament. 
Perhaps we may call it "de-armament." To confiscate Ger- 
many's existing weapons may actually be of advantage to 
her. The confiscated equipment thus acquired by the 
United Nations would soon become obsolete, while Ger- 
many could plan a newer and more effective arsenal. The 
reverse was true when Germany attacked. The democracies, 
having been caught unprepared, built newer arms. When 
they tooled for bombers, fighter planes or tanks, they had 
the advantages of constant and speedy improvements in 
models. Burdened by her early start, Germany was con- 
structing obsolete models and feared to take time out to 
completely overhaul her military machine. Thus, though 
our quantity was greatly behind schedule, we often ap- 
proached equality through quality.* Perhaps some moral 
law of retribution came to the aid of civilization's cause 
enabling us to punish those who prepared early, and to help 
those whose unpreparedness revealed peaceful intent. We 
must not stock ourselves with old weapons and permit the 

*This is the explanation of the first triumph in the Battle of Britain 
when Germany was at the very zenith of her power. She used bombing 
planes not constructed for heavy loads but rather for auxiliary use 
in support of tank and infantry forces. Britain used Spitfires specially 
designed for their task. That was why so few British pilots were able 
to earn so much for so many of us. The later models of Lancaster 
and Flying Fortress demonstrated what Germany's bombers should 
have been to be effective. 


Germans surreptitiously to build a modern super- jugger- 
naut. So in addition to confiscating her weapons, all 
plants engaged in producing war material will have to 
be stripped, and the factories demolished. This machinery 
must be moved abroad or scrapped. All stocks of metal, 
oil, and rubber in excess of current civilian requirements 
should be removed, and the Germans should never be per- 
mitted to accumulate stock piles of strategic materials. 

But even more important, the machine tool, iron, steel, 
aluminum, chemical, and other industries which provide 
the possibility of reconstructing these plants must be re- 
moved from German direction, either physically, or through 
control of management. One method of control would be 
to place the majority stock of these "heavy industries" in 
trust with representatives of the United Nations. If, as 
shall be explored later in this chapter, jurisdiction is con- 
ferred upon an international body to cope with economic 
problems, that organization could act as trustee. In either 
event, German industry, which has been, and is, highly cen- 
tralized, would be deprived of the opportunity of circum- 
venting the disarmament provisions of any armistice. 

No reliance can be had upon mere inspection of fac- 
tories to determine whether they are really building 
military equipment. The difficulty of unravelling German 
industrial intrigue is too great. Moreover, the ardor for 
investigation diminishes with time. Control of industrial 
policy is essential. Industrial control at the source would 
eliminate the danger of relaxed supervision. Like most 
undramatic tasks, there is conscientious intensity in the 
beginning and later the gradual bribery of boredom. We 
must not, in so vital a matter, rely solely upon the fevered 
alertness of early occupation days. The Germans could 
operate the plants and have day-to-day supervision, but the 
international trustees should have final power to approve 
all personnel, contracts, investments, corporate finance, 


and all foreign arrangements, whether by cartel or other- 
wise. It would then be impossible for German indus- 
trialists to establish, through foreign affiliates, an 
espionage and sabotage organization under the guise of 
business enterprise. The most dangerous form of the fifth 
column would be eliminated. 

Just as the object of a good physician is to prevent 
rather than cure disease, so this industrial control would 
stifle secret armament at its source. No longer would 
it be necessary to unravel the illimitable complexities of 
foreign subsidiaries; of contract associations; of corpora- 
tions ostensibly owned by citizens of the resident country ; 
of patents and licenses in their names; of deals to limit 
production of strategic materials; of price-fixing; of ar- 
rangements which aided German research and stymied 
our own chemical ingenuity. No longer would the most 
remarkable of German alchemies exist, in which lipstick 
containers turn out to be cartridge shells, washing ma- 
chines become anti-aircraft bases, telescopes become field 
artillery, and moving vans grow up to be tanks. 

Not the least advantage from such a program would be 
the elimination of the demagogic solution of unemploy- 
ment namely, the building of armaments. Dictators have 
often resorted to this artificial remedy for economic dis- 
tress. It has served too many of their illegitimate plans 
such as the creation of a military force to protect their own 
regime and feed on others' ; the appeasement of the victims 
of "capitalism" (though fascism is state capitalism with- 
out social welfare) ; the glamor of military uniform, to 
make gangsterism respectable; the esteem of the soldier's 
profession with its assumption of patriotism. In three 
years under Hitler, German unemployment was reduced 
from six million to less than a million. In the fourth, 
1937, Germany actually imported labor. If the world's 


capacity to observe and interpret had not been crippled 
by a curious sort of self -hypnosis, it would have seen and 
understood in this simple fact that the storm of destruc- 
tion was approaching. 

Iron and Rye 

Finally, economic disarmament must include agrarian 
reform and the breaking up of the Prussian feudal estates. 
In 1879 Bismarck announced his famous "compact of iron 
and rye." This was a high protective policy which aligned 
heavy industry and the feudal landowners against the mid- 
dle classes. To justify this shift in political power, resort 
was once more made to agrarian mysticism the holiness 
of German soil. This was contrasted with the "godless" So- 
cial Democratic movement and the "Jewish" capitalist 
traders. Thus, long before Hitler and the Nazis, the super- 
stition of the superiority of German soil and blood was 
offered to protect the Junkers, the landowning aristocratic 
and military caste of Prussia. 

Until a generation ago, there were really only two 
classes in Prussia, the feudal estate-owners and the peas- 
ants. This contributed to the German caste system, the 
social cleavage, and the fanatical acceptance of au- 
thority. This also explains the paternalism of Prussia. 
In South Germany, where there was a wider distribution 
of land under peasant proprietorship, the German Gemut- 
lichkeit had an opportunity to develop. 

The Junkers remained the ruling class throughout both 
World Wars. It controlled legislation and joined with 
Hitler to express Prussian arrogance towards the world. 
This landowning class, the fanatical sponsors of super-na- 
tionalism, must be smashed. It should not be permitted to 
survive, as it did after the defeat of the Kaiser. Its privi- 
leged economic position, based upon an arbitrary and 


excessive protection of grain, wheat and rye, must be de- 
stroyed. Its estates must be confiscated and distributed 
to the peasants in small parcels. "Agrarian reform, redis- 
tribution of the land, such as occurred in several Euro- 
pean countries after the last war, is an essenital basis for 
democracy and peaceful co-operation." (J. B. Condliffe, 
Agenda for A Post-War World.) 

It is significant that Germans who seek to wash the 
curse off their land place special emphasis upon this re- 
form. For example, Professor Einstein has written: "I 
am convinced that a fresh aggression on the part of 
Germany can be avoided only if the control of industry 
on German soil is taken out of German hands, and the 
large estates dispossessed and parcelled out." 

The Quality of Mercy 

Immediately after the armistice, the distressful condi- 
tion of Europe will require a generous healing hand. Such 
are the insanities of war that the greater the battle, the 
more there is to rebuild; the more effective the blockade, 
the more there are to feed. These are not our doing. The 
civilized world practices killing and destruction only so 
that these forces may not permanently be enthroned. But 
reconstruction automatically includes the extension of 
mercy even to the undeserving. It is estimated that 
9,268,138 tons of concentrated foods will have to be sent to 
Europe in the first six months after the armistice, if any 
kind of order is to be maintained. Repayment can be 
made by the recipients in the form of raw materials and 
other products which the food-producing countries may 
require. France, the Netherlands and Belgium, which will 
require the greatest shipments, are fortunately in a posi- 
tion to pay in gold and foreign exchange. Assuming, 
however, that this aid becomes a "gift", we should not be 


deterred. Even on selfish terms, and entirely apart from 
humanitarian considerations, it will be cheaper than the 
expensive block-busters we delivered free over Hamburg, 
or the millions of tons of gasoline our jeeps consumed in 
Africa, or the warship a day we have been constructing. 
Compared with the billions of dollars it has cost to destroy 
an evil order in Europe, the cost of restoring a decent order 
is trivial. "The United States," wrote Walter Lippmann, 
"has a very great interest in seeing that the liberated 
continent goes back to work." 

In Germany, children should be aided first, and pains 
should be taken through the planting of the American, 
British and other United Nations flags and the distribu- 
tion of printed material, to advise them that it is the democ- 
racies which bring them succor. For no opportunity 
should be lost, as we shall soon see, to begin the re-educa- 
tion as well as the disarmament of the German people. 

It is a significant humanitarian fact that no phase of 
post-war planning has advanced farther than the solution 
of the food problem. Forty-four nations have already 
signed the agreement for the establishment of a United 
Nations Belief and Rehabilitation Administration. 

International Economic Control of Germany 

These are some of the prophylactic and relief measures 
which must be taken. But the dynamic equilibrium be- 
tween preventive measures and relief requires interna- 
tional controls. After the last war we were caught in the 
vortex of two opposing economic tides. One sought to pun- 
ish Germany and make her pay. The other sought to aid 
Germany and give her economic stability. We achieved 
neither objective. It is small solace to the planners that 
German deception intervened to turn all their economic 
theories topsy-turvy. 


The responsibility is ours to make it impossible for 
German trickery again to seize the day. The task is 
made more difficult by a whole series of dilemmas: we 
must insist that Germany make restitution, which will 
deprive her of illegally acquired wealth. Yet at the same 
time we wish to avoid a German economic collapse which 
would spread to the rest of Europe. 

We desire to make Germans rebuild the areas they 
devastated for this, too, is a form of restitution. Yet at 
the same time we do not want German forced labor to 
create unemployment problems in the rebuilt countries. 

We wish to disarm Germany completely, thus relieving 
her of enormous expense. Yet we do not wish to have our 
industries burdened by the cost of maintaining armaments. 

We desire to relieve the immediate distress in Germany. 
Yet we do not wish to suffer the expense of perpetual 

We intend that German reparations shall be paid. Yet 
we must not risk her method of dumping merchandise on 
our markets. These are but some of the economic conflicts. 

The correct policy is clear in general terms : Germany 
must pay to whatever extent she may be able, without in- 
jury to her own or world economy. But only through in- 
ternational control can these conflicts be successfully re- 
solved. The ultimate goal must be the establishment of a 
more stable order and a more co-operative trading system. 
Details for such a plan cannot be fixed. It must be flexible. 
It must be subject to constant supervision and readjust- 
ment. That is why a supra-national economic body is 
essential. Such a World Economic Commission would 
prevent makeshift arrangements and desperate, last minute 
Dawes, and Young Plans to deal with crises already in 
existence. It could engineer the controls so as to keep 
Germany's economy sufficiently healthy to make the max- 
imum restitution. The imposition of arbitrary punitive 


reparations is objectionable not because of any sympa- 
thetic or sentimental reasons, but because they are uncol- 
lectible. And in the course of non-collection, world 
economy, a highly sensitive organism, would become dis- 

Under the close supervision of an international com- 
mission, Germany's economic condition could be amelior- 
ated and improved while at the same time she would be 
obliged to make restitution. Leading economists, such as 
Professor Eugene Staley, J. E. Meade, Professor P. E. 
Corbett, Professor Edward H. Carr and Professor J. B. 
Condliffe subscribe to this view. They believe that greater 
wealth as well as reparations can be created by intelligent 
co-ordination. Germany's standard of living has been so 
low since Hitler's rise that it will be possible to improve it, 
despite reparation and restitution. Under proper guid- 
ance, Germany could produce beyond its increased needs 
and use the surplus to repair the damage done. 

Economic forces are so uncertain and at times so 
surprising, their consequences so involved and unfore- 
seeable, that static and definite plans to deal with them 
are bound to be defective. A dynamic solution must be 
sought, one that adjusts itself to progress. Who knows 
what new industries will arise? Who knows what new 
secrets advancing chemical knowledge will unfold? And 
how can we judge in advance what newly developed mate- 
rials or products will be required, or in what parts of the 
world they will happen to be situated? Who can say what 
new technological processes will have to be financed, and 
whether it may not be advisable to exploit German effi- 
ciency and skill along peaceful lines by setting up some of 
these new industries in her midst for the benefit of world 
economy as well as her own? 

An international board of directors (similar to the 
World Investment Commission and World Investment 


Bank proposed by Professor Eugene Staley) to consider 
these business opportunities, could bring them to fruition. 
No supplanting of private enterprise is here contemplated. 
On the contrary, it should be encouraged. Its initiative 
and efficiency are not easily maintained by governmental 
bodies. But the very power it generates must be chan- 
neled in the interest of society. The controls in the 
domestic sphere, such as anti-trust laws and taxation de- 
vices, which we apply to protect the public interest, must 
similarly be applied in the enlarged realm of international 
economic activity. Abuse of strength is a self-destructive 
tendency. Enlightened private enterprise is well aware 
that it can best remain private when it conforms to social 

Economic Isolationism Is Also Bankrupt 

Our attention to the German problem must not make 
us forgetful of our primary concern for her victims. 
But Germany is not an island unto herself. She is part 
of the economic mainland. Epidemics of economic 
disease cross national borders. Solution of the German 
problem will help solve the world's problem. But the re- 
lationship is bilateral. Complete solution of the German 
dilemma requires the absence of international economic 
anarchy. The responsibility is ours so to direct the eco- 
nomic forces as to derive from them the greatest well-being 
possible for all peoples, including the Germans. Isolation- 
ism is no more feasible in the economic than in the political 

There was a time when the free movement of goods 
without controls was responsible for the greatest advance 
in the standards of living the world has ever known ; and 
this period was also the longest stretch of comparative 


peace that man lias known. But developments and com- 
plexities of growth have altered the situation. 

There is a period in every town when traffic proceeds 
most speedily if unhindered by direction. But with growth, 
the "let-thein-ride" formula becomes dangerous. Traffic 
lights and policemen must curb the flow of vehicles and 
give them direction, or there are hopeless snarls and acci- 
dents. Economic traffic is no different. It may come to a 
standstill of depression in the very act of making haste. 
Such chaos is avoidable by international co-operation. 

Co-ordination can bring prosperity where unilateral 
conduct leaves only depression. Technological progress 
requires exchange of raw materials, and selfish national 
restrictions only come back to plague those who apply 

Necessity has already compelled considerable regional 
economic cooperation. There is the Inter-American Eco- 
nomic and Financial Advisory Committee and Develop- 
ment Commission. There is its plan for an Inter- American 
Bank. Here the purpose has been to explore and develop 
regional resources, to adjust labor supply to local require- 
ments, and to secure capital for desirable enterprises. 

The League of Nations' experts and many other econ- 
omists saw the stupidities of economic anarchy. The 
League raised loans for the relief of Austria and Hungary. 
It sought to overcome the effects of rising tariffs by draft- 
ing conventions for the simplification and publication of 
customs rates. It warned of the dangers involved in im- 
port and export prohibitions. But it had no power. It 
could only study, report, advise and adjure. 

In 1939 the League of Nations adopted a report pro- 
viding that its economic activities should be separated 
from its political activities. In other words the League 
Council was to surrender jurisdiction, so that states not 
belonging to the League could be invited to participate in 


its economic activities. The directing body of the economic 
section was to be made up of 24 state representatives and 
eight non-governmental members. The League Assembly 
appointed an organizing committee which met at The 
Hague in February, 1940. 

This suspended plan may well be lifted from cold 
storage to serve as the nucleus of a supra-national organ- 
ization to co-ordinate international economics. Fine pre- 
cept is afforded by the International Labor Organization, 
likewise voluntarily divorced from the League, and the 
Bank of International Settlements. Under such a supra- 
national economic authority a Central Bank could be es- 
tablished, similar to the Federal Keserve Bank, with 
power to raise or lower interest rates simultaneously in 
all countries. Thus credit could be expanded or contracted 
in accordance with the best interests of all nations. There 
would be an "engineer" in charge of the project, and it 
would not be permitted to run aimlessly. Exchange rates 
could be stabilized and an international revolving fund 
could be utilized to check the distress resulting from the 
fluctuations of short-term credits. 

Above all, quotas, tariffs and other restrictions on trade 
could be controlled. Tariffs would be encouraged for in- 
fant industries. The international body's jurisdiction 
would include control of cartels, which could then be trans- 
formed into instruments of international collaboration 
instead of international conspiracy. 

To those who may be more willing to accept a novel idea 
after it has been partially tried and found to be practic- 
able, reference is made to the Tripartite Agreement among 
the United States, Great Britain, and France in Sep- 
tember, 1936. Subsequently, Belgium, Holland and 
Switzerland joined the pact. All agreed "to main- 
tain the greatest possible equilibrium in the system of in- 


ternational exchange and to avoid to the utmost extent the 
creation of any disturbance of that system by national 
monetary action." This agreement was effective, though of 
course, it suffered from a limited scope. 

None of this is starry-eyed idealism. It is the hard- 
est common sense, and good business. The United Nations 
have subscribed to the Atlantic Charter which provides : 


"Fourth : They will endeavor with due respect for their 
existing obligations to farther the enjoyment by all states, 
great or small, victor or vanquished, of access, on equal 
terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world 
which are needed for their economic prosperity; 

Fifth : They desire to bring about the fullest collabora- 
tion between all nations in the economic field with the 
object of securing, for all, improved labor standards, eco- 
nomic advancement and social security;" 

But the Charter can be made effective only if it is imple- 
mented by some supra-national machinery. Such inter- 
national co-operation will ultimately be thought as com- 
monplace as our long-standing association with the League 
of Nations to prevent shipment of opium, to take measures 
against the spread of dread diseases, and to encourage 
economic research. While the United States shunned the 
League, it became an active member of the International 
Labor Organization and of the Bank for International 
Settlements. As recently as November, 1941, thirty-two 
nations met in conference in the United States under the 
auspices of the International Labor Organization to dis- 
cuss plans for economic and social reconstruction. 

A similar body devoted to international economic prob- 
lems is the real solution for a whole series of perplexing 
problems, of which the German is only one. 


Filling the Stomach Before the Mind 

As the program evolves, it takes on the shape of a peace, 
politically hard but economically generous. Economic jus- 
tice necessarily includes the painful task of restitution, 
and at least partial reparation. To absolve the German 
people from this burden would constitute economic injus- 
tice to the Russians, whose factories, dams and farms have 
been mercilessly destroyed, and millions of whose citizens 
have been forced into slave labor, and to the French, 
Czechs, Poles, Yugoslavs, Dutch, and other victims of 
German outrage. Foresight likewise requires that, in 
lieu of revenge, practical steps be taken to prevent Ger- 
many from ever again having the means to ravage the 
world. Some of the measures to accomplish this end have 
been outlined. Nevertheless the program envisions Ger- 
many benefiting from an improved world economy and 
learning that temporary loot is not the means to genuine 
wealth; and that the price of military achievement is the 
constant lowering of standards of living. 

Those who write the peace must be gifted with the 
righteousness which comes from a justified anger against 
the immediate past, and a calm determination about the 
long future. Combined the two can achieve that elusive 
and unprecise concept, justice. The groundwork must be 
laid in Germany itself, for a healthy economy, in which the 
German disease will have less ground to fester and in 
which our own efforts to make the probationary period 
a successful one can best function. Economic conditioning 
for the educational process is vital. 




"Men will be brutal," said Voltaire, "so long as they 
believe absurdities." 

The most charitable view which can be taken of per- 
sistent German derangement in international conduct is 
that her people have been conditioned by false teachings 
for many generations. Germany's resort to a second World 
War after having been beaten in her first assault, might 
lead the impatient to declare her incurable a case of "bad 
blood." Such counsel of despair has been given by many 
an author. One wrote: "This book as I stated at the out- 
set, is written in the firm conviction that the menace will 
remain and that there is no practical and certain way of 
removing it." (Jack Cherry, Once and for All.) The Ger- 
mans' own racial theories would support such a view. 
Having enthroned the imperishable characteristics of 
blood, soil and race, their own "qualities" might be deemed 
ineradicable. Professor Karl A. Kuhn in his book, The 
True Causes of War, wrote : "Must Kultur rear its domes 
over mountains of corpses, oceans of tears, and the death 
rattle of the conquered? Yes, it must! . . . The might 
of the conqueror is the highest law of morality, be- 
fore which the conquered must bow." Professor Werner 
Sombart of Berlin University in his book, Hucksters and 
Heroes, wrote: "War appears to us who are filled with 
military zeal as in itself a holy thing, as the holiest thing 
on earth." 


Professor Adolf Lasson in Das Kulturideal ttnd dcr 
Krieg, ante-dating Hitler by sixty-five years, wrote: "Be- 
tween states there is only one force of right, the right of 
the stronger. It is perfectly reasonable that wars should 
arise between states. 

"It is impossible that a state should commit a crime 
. . . Not all the treaties in the world alter the fact that the 
weak is always the prey of the stronger, whenever the lat- 
ter desires and is able to assert this principle. As soon as 
we consider states as intelligent entities, lawsuits between 
them are seen to be capable of solution only by material 

"The state which is organized only for peace is not a 
true state; the state reveals its whole significance only by 
its preparations for war . . . Law is the friend of the 
weak. War is a fundamental phenomenon in the life of 
the state, and the preparation for it occupies a place of the 
first importance in national life." 

Plain speaking, and quite discouraging for those who 
recognize no inherited characteristics which differentiate 
one human being from another. How ironically alluring 
it would be to adopt the Nazis' own theories of unchange- 
able blood stigma and declare them forever the pariahs of 
society! What philosophical retribution it would be to 
condemn them by their own standards and thus justify a 
Carthaginian peace ! The murderer professes to be a scien- 
tist and assures the court that he is incurable and beyond 
redemption. Since he would impose death on innocents, 
he agrees that no mercy should be exhibited to him. But 
justice does not listen to him or his superstitions, for this 
is no game of polemics, in which the victim may be trapped 
by his logic. 

We hold the race theory to be arrant nonsense. It is 
no more valid for Aryans than for non-Aryans. Its thesis 
that corruption lies in the blood stream is not worthy of 


scientific disproof. How else could one explain that other 
Germany, the Germany of Goethe, Lessing, Kant, Schiller, 
and Beethoven, none of whom was a nationalist? There is 
no "difference of gray matter and muscular tissue which 
distinguishes a man born between such and such lines of 
longitude and latitude from all other men, white, black, 
brown or yellow." Sir Norman Angell, "Responsibility, 
Punishment, Reparation" (The Dial, Dec. 28, 1918). 

In the ninth century, Scandinavians were the war-like 
Vikings of the sea. Today, they are exemplars of peace- 
loving people. 

No, there is hope for the Germans. They are born 
as normal as any of us. What, then, is the explanation for 
their psychopathic quest for world-rule? 

"The Most Important Fact of the Last Half Century" 

Experiments conducted with children show that, com- 
pared with other animals, the human being has few in- 
stincts and that they are the same for all, irrespective of 
race. A child will have an instinctive fear of sudden loud 
noises, of falling, of lack of support. It will not instinc- 
tively fear any animal whether it be a snake, a crocodile or 
another human being. Most of its fears and likes are the 
result of conditioning from experience ; similarly, it has no 
natural craving to kill another animal or to enslave it. 
This, too, must be learned. The higher the stratum of the 
animal kingdom, the lower the proportion of instincts. The 
opportunity for learning is automatically increased. A frog 
cannot learn as much as a mammal, such as a rat or dog, 
and its behavior is governed by instinct to a much greater 
degree. Man inherits the most highly evolved brain of 
any animal in the world. It contains at birth few behavior 
patterns. It is conditioned by learning; and therefore 


man's behavior is plastic, being subject to improvement 
through experience. 

To look for the source of the German war-like "in- 
stincts," which are not instincts at all, we must trace the 
educational streams from which they have been drinking. 
At the same time we can take comfort that purer water 
may effect a cure. Though the task is difficult and fraught 
with uncertainty, and though we may find resistance in 
the patient, who is still under the influence of the poison- 
ous draughts, there is at least the possibility of success. 
Scientists are accustomed to years of painstaking experi- 
ments with only a glimmer of hope that the trail is not 
completely false. Can the political scientist hesitate be- 
cause fulfillment is not assured? 

Prior findings have been recorded, tracing the poison to 
corrupted education. H. G. Wells has written, "It cannot 
be too clearly stated it is the most important fact in 
the history of the last half century, that the German 
people was methodically indoctrinated with the idea of a 
German world-predominance based on might and with 
the theory that war was a necessary thing in life." 

The key to German historical teaching is to be found 
in Count Moltke's dictum: "Perpetual peace is a dream, 
and it is not even a beautiful dream. War is an element 
in the order of the world ordained by God. Without war 
the world would stagnate and lose itself in materialism." 
Nietzsche agreed. "It is mere illusion and pretty senti- 
ment," he wrote, "to expect much (even anything at all) 
from mankind if it forgets how to make war. As yet no 
means are known which call so much into action as a great 
war, that rough energy born of the damp, that deep im- 
personality born of hatred, that conscience born of mur- 
der and cold-bloodedness, that fervour born of effort in 
the annihilation of the enemy, that proud indifference to 
loss, to one's own existence, to that of one's fellows, that 


earthquake-like soul-shaking which a people needs when 
it is losing its vitality." 

Self -Education After World War I 

Even after the Hohenzollern dynasty fell in 1918, the 
educational processes in Germany ran the usual course, 

Text-books and lectures, the embodiment of distilled 
Pan-Germanism, remained the same. German secondary 
schools and universities consisted of the same Gymna- 
sium, the Realschule and Realgymnasium, and taught the 
same courses. 

Brave constitutional provisions were adopted, requiring 
enlightened teaching, but, like the republic itself, they 
were an experiment never taken seriously. 

The constitution of the German Republic, adopted in 
Weimar in 1919, stated (Section 148) : 

"In every school the educational aims must be moral 
training, education in citizenship, personal and vocational 
efficiency and above all, the cultivation of German national 
character and of the spirit of international reconciliation. 

"In public school teaching care is to be taken not to 
wound the feelings and susceptibilities of those holding 
different opinions." 

The Prussian teachers, particularly, found the "culti- 
vation of German national character" and "the spirit of 
international reconciliation" incompatible. When they 
were required to teach Section 148, they commented to 
their classes: "This is a very nice ideal and it may be 
that some day in the future we can educate our youth in 
such a spirit. As long, however, as French colored troops 
are quartered on our German Rhine, we cannot even talk 
about international reconciliation." 


This incitation to hatred and revenge was given in the 
guise of interpreting a constitutional provision on toler- 
ance. The Prussian educational tradition which prevailed 
in the German school system was "a deception practiced 
for the bolder political.end of rearing the individual to be 
part and parcel of an artificial and despotic system of 
government, of training him to be either its instrument 
or its slave, according to his social station." Samuel 
Laing, Notes of a Traveller. 

The plans for democratic self-government in the schools 
fared badly under the republic. On April 2, 1920, the 
State Education Department issued a regulation that the 
pupils of all classes should, at the beginning of each year, 
elect a speaker by a secret poll. The regulation fur- 
ther provided that the speakers of the higher classes would 
form an administrative body, a students' committee, and 
that a general assembly of all students should be called 
at regular intervals to discuss and regulate all matters 
of interest to the student body. This well conceived ex- 
periment in localized democracy was a complete failure. 
The student bodies split up along racial lines, or indulged 
in purely political arguments without doing any construc- 
tive work on the administration of the school. The majority 
of the students was anti-republican and anti-democratic. 
They believed in the old-fashioned rule of absolute author- 
ity, and deliberately sabotaged the provisions for self- 
government in order to prove that they were ludicrous. 
The democratic minority, believing in free speech even for 
the enemies of their experiment, was unable to prevent 
disturbances which made a mockery of self-government, 
With endless rant the anti-democratic forces contended 
that only fruitless talk and indecision can come from a 
deliberating assembly. Insisting upon their democratic 
right to be heard, they proved their point by their own 


conduct. In this manner, throughout German schools, the 
movement toward democratic self -discipline was sabotaged. 

These scandalous exhibitions were enactments on a 
tiny scale of what was happening in the larger political 
sphere of the German Republic. 

All this was beyond the ken of the German educational 
administrators. Even teachers whose sympathies were with 
the democratic provisions of the regulations, were unable 
to cope with this hostility. The moral is that liberal regu- 
lations, laws, or even constitutions, do not make a democ- 
racy. It is not pronouncement of faiths, but practice of 
them, which can make them a working reality. Education 
must precede practice. The reverse process results in 
the attainment of neither. Obviously, the problem cannot* 
be left to the solution of the present school-masters. They 
and their predecessors have betrayed the democratic faith. 
They have been so steeped in the prussian tradition that 
their loyalties have demanded the sabotage of the noblest 
educational principle, teaching the truth. The Prussian 
is distinguished by his loyalty to superiors and his obedi- 
ence to duty, irrespective of sacrifice. His best qualities, 
because of deluded motivation, are therefore arrayed 
against us. One may as well trust the German High 
Command to disarm Germany as to trust the teachers of 
Germany to re-educate its youth. 

The Devil's Brew 

The enormity of the problem can only be fully com- 
prehended by an examination of the educational system 
which has developed under Hitler. It surpasses our worst 

The distortion of truth becomes a recognized pedagogic 
device. It accelerates the inculcation of an insupportable 
credo. Falsehood then becomes an ideal. Fiction sup- 


plants fact so often that the mind rebels at elementary 
truths in favor of familiar lies. The whole concoction of 
mendacity is stirred with prejudice and hate, and thick- 
ened by hypnotic repetition. It is really a devil's brew, to 
unseat the mind and deprive it of all critical qualities. It 
implants fanaticism and the desire to murder. Those who 
cannot understand the relentless cruelty of the German 
people marching off to kill and plunder, must study Ger- 
man education, brought to its extreme perfection under 
the Nazis. Their incredulity will disappear. 
Mein Kampf sets forth the objective: 

"The whole end of education in a people's state and 
its crown, is found by burning into the heart and brain 
of the youth entrusted to it an instinctive and compre- 
hended sense of race ... It is the duty of a national 
state to see to it that a history of the world is eventually 
written in which the question of race shall occupy a pre- 
dominant position . . . According to this plan, the cur- 
riculum must be built up with this point of view. Accord- 
ing to this plan, education must be so arranged that the 
young person leaving school is not half pacifist, democrat 
or what have you, but a complete German . . . The aim of 
the education of women must be inflexibly that of the 
future mother." 

The fact that mis-education is the most important 
weapon in the arsenal of war is frankly stated in Mein 

"The question is not how we can manufacture arms. 
Bather it is, how can we create the spirit which renders a 
people capable of bearing arms? When this spirit dom- 
inates a people, will-power finds a thousand ways, each of 
which leads to a weapon." 

With systematic thoroughness, the Nazis have distorted 
the approach to every academic subject. A teachers' text- 


book by Karl Alne advises that the teaching of history 
"is a means of solving the political-historical task of the 
people the aim of instruction is preparation for the 
battle for self-assertion of a people . . . The history of the 
world is to be recorded from the racial point of view." 

In the periodical, Nationalsozialistisches Bildungs- 
wesen, Friedrich Freider writes: "History is the science 
of political education. Present and future instruction in 
history take cognizance of the fact that the aims are not so 
much scientific as political," and he adds in italics: "The 
ground for our teaching of history consists of nothing but 
following the Fuehrer." 

The official Nazi teachers' manual and guide, Erzie- 
hung und Unterricht, gives the following directive: 

"The main topic for the history teacher should be the 
German nation with its Germanic characteristics and its 
grandeur, its fateful struggle for inner and outer self- 

"Out of the faith of the National Socialistic movement 
in the future of the German nation has arisen a new under- 
standing of the German past. History instruction must 
be based on this living faith, it must fill our youth with 
the realization that it belongs to a nation which of all 
European nations has suffered longest and most severely 
before it was unified, but which today can face the future 
with confidence. This kind of instruction will open to our 
youth the most noble aspect of our past, which, in turn, 
will deepen our feeling of our own worthiness and our 
greatness . . . The principles of race distinction teach us 
not only to recognize the fundamental characteristics of 
our nation, but offer the key to universal world history." 

In other words, history is not a study of the past but 
an artificial construction of events to justify the Nazi 


History is complemented by instruction in geopolitics, 
which expounds theories as to how and why Germany must 
rule the world. 

The geography teacher is instructed by the official 
teachers' guide that "we Germans must have our share of 
the world and its treasures." Geography is called upon to 
make real Germans and real National Socialists. 

The teacher of North American geography is given a 
special assignment. He must instruct his student that 
"America is a country where changes of race and landscape 
have been produced by immigrating Europeans, who have 
come there because of economic reasons. The conditions 
of the country before this migration, mixture of races and 
the results, economic progress, economic exploitation, mass 
production, overproduction, the Negro question, the prob- 
lem of the yellow race on the west coast, the Indian ques- 
tion are to be other topics for discussion." 

The Nazi educated youth conceives of an American as 
a demoralized, blood-polluted and enfeebled hybrid, en- 
meshed in racial problems and incapable of decision. 

The biology instructors are told by the teachers' guide 
that "biology plays an important part in National So- 
cialistic ideology . . . Biology is especially suited to destroy 
the myth that man is primarily intellectual." 

The chemistry teacher is directed to emphasize the im- 
portance of military and aerial defense, and to reveal to 
the young students how important it is that engineers, 
laborers, and business men work together for a greater 

Even mathematics, the impartial science, is bent and 
twisted by the Nazis. The teachers' guide advises: "The 
dependence of this subject on race is obvious. It is char- 
acteristic of the Nordic spirit that it conquered the great 
realm of force with the creating hand as well as with the 


pondering mind. The philosophical speculations of a 
Copernicus, a Kepler, a Leibnitz, a Kant and a Gauss 
have an ideological foundation placed on mathematics." 

Occidental mathematics is described as "Aryan spirit- 
ual property" and the "expression of the Nordic fighting 
spirit," thus ignoring the fact that mathematics was de- 
veloped originally by the Greeks and in the Middle Ages 
by Arabs and Jews. 

The smallest mathematics problem is turned into a 
propaganda device. Children are requested to compute 
how many Germans were lost through the Treaty of Ver- 
sailles, or how many bombs an airplane can carry, or how 
deep air-raid shelters should be. 

Erziehung und Unterricht bluntly states that the Ger- 
man school is part and parcel of National Socialistic order, 
and that "it has the mission to mold the National Social- 
istic being . . . The National Socialistic system of education 
does not stem from a pedagogic theory, but is the result 
of political conflicts and its laws ... It is therefore the 
mission of the German schools to rear men and women who, 
in true willingness to sacrifice all for nation and Fuehrer, 
are able to lead a truly German life." 

Every German child says "Heil Hitler" from fifty to 
one hundred-fifty times a day. Every child belongs to at 
least one Nazi organization, such as the Jungvolk or the 
League of German Girls. A literal report (Patsy Ziemer, 
Two Thousand and Ten Days of Hitler) of a typical his- 
tory lesson includes the teacher's questions: 

"Who is the most important and the most noble hu- 
man being in the world today?" 

The class screams in unison, "Der Fuehrer." 

"What must we do to our Fuehrer?" 

"We must love and revere him," they all shout. 


"Why must every German girl thank God on her knees 
every night?" 

"Because he has given us the Fuehrer." 

"Why has God given us the Fuehrer?" 

"To save us." 

"From what has the Fuehrer saved us?" 

"From ruin." 

"What else?" 

"From Communism." 

"From what else?" 

"From the rest of the world." 

"What is the Fuehrer?" 

"He is the savior of Germany." 

"Yes, the Fuehrer is our savior. He has made Ger- 
many again strong and respected. He has made Germany 
the most powerful nation, so that we can protect Germans 
everywhere. What has he given us?" 

"The strongest army in the world." 

"What else?" 

"The strongest air force." 

"What must we do every night?" 

"We must thank God for the Fuehrer." 

"What is the greatest dream of every German girl?" 

"To see the Fuehrer," the girls shout. 

"What is an even greater dream than that?" 

"To touch the Fuehrer's hand," boys and girls answer. 

Having completed their history lesson, the children, 
then proceed to the biology class. The textbook used in all 
German grammar schools is The Nazi Primer. It pro- 
claims the "unlikeness of man", and that the possession of 
pure German blood is essential for admission into the com- 
munity of German people. Then a complicated course 
in biology and anthropology is summarized, and the Ger- 


man racial theory established as scientific fact. The 
Primer teaches: 

There are six races in Europe, different not only 
physically, but in mind and action ; Nordic, Phalic, West- 
ern, Dinaric, Eastern and East Baltic. 

Most of the Nordics are found in Germany but there 
are also many in the other lands of Northern Europe, such 
as Scotland, Sweden and Norway. 

Nordics are outstanding in truthfulness and energy; 
action, not talk, is the Nordic motto, and hence they are 
predisposed to leadership by nature. 

Closely related to the Nordic is the Phalic, inhabiting 
chiefly Westphalia, Sweden and the Canary Islands; the 
Phalic are better suited to be the driving force under the 
leadership of the Nordics than for leadership themselves. 

The Westerns predominate in England and France and 
are different in soul qualities, are loquacious and excit- 
able, and lack creative power. 

The Dinaric race is somewhat similar to the Nordic 
in soul qualities, is proud and brave, and is found in south- 
west and central Germany. 

Unfortunately, however, great thinking abilities are 
not found in them. 

The Eastern and East Baltic races are found in Hol- 
land, the Baltics and parts of Italy and France, and their 
histories show that they have always been unable to lead 

To prove the accuracy of all these teachings, the su- 
periority of the Nordics and their mission to rule over in- 
ferior races, the Primer cites the Mendelian theory of 
heredity and applies it to the formation of races! 

Having completed his biology lesson, the child then 
proceeds to the courtyard. In doing so, he must pass 
through various class rooms where he sees signs framed 


on the walls. By order of the German Minister of Edu- 
cation issued in 1934, each room must display such slogans 
as : "The Ten Commandments are the deposit of the low- 
est human instincts," "The people's state will have to 
fight for its existence" and, "The final goal always to be 
kept in mind in the education of a girl is that she is one 
day to be a mother." 

The courtyard is covered with sand so that it will al- 
ways be dry for marching marching! 

The bottom layer of pseudo-scientific misinformation is 
the most important, but it was not relied upon by the 
Nazis nor by their predecessors for "fixing" the German 
mind. Layer after layer of prejudice and falsehood is im- 
posed upon this foundation in the higher schools, and 
finally the brilliant polish of a typical German mentality is 
supplied by the university professors. Learned men 
prostitute the truth willingly in the service of the German 
mission. The child, now grown up, is helplessly receptive, 
and acquires the ultimate persuasion in every tenet of 
falsehood. By such elaborate processes are human beings, 
outwardly cultured and apparently normal, turned into 
savages. Far worse than savages, they have the training 
and efficiency which make them "backward" only in the 
civilized sense, not in their organization or weapons. 

The German child is molded into these barbaric pat- 
terns before its sense of discrimination has been sufficiently 
developed to protect it. The magnificent plastic quality 
of the brain, which permits unlimited development, has 
been exploited for evil doctrine. Not the least of German 
crimes, and ranking with the enslavement of millions of 
foreign workers, has been the mental enslavement of its 
own youth. For here there is no resistance, no under- 
ground. They wait for no invading army to set them free. 
They are in that lowest state of slavery : contentment with 
their own degradation. And this is the most dangerous of 


all the Nazi works, for it cannot be undone by victory 
alone. It is a self -perpetuating force of the Nazi horror, a 
growing automaton which, when it attains full size, will 
goose-step again, tramping the wheat fields and setting 
cities aflame. 

This poisonous conditioning of generation after genera- 
tion of German minds is "the most important fact in the 
history of the last half century." Disarmament has failed 
chiefly because we have not recognized that "de-mentaliza- 
tion," so to speak, must accompany it. The fanatical urge 
to conquer sets in motion a whole chain of conspirational 
acts against man's neighborliness. All crimes committed 
in the name of Pan-Germanism are viewed by the criminals 
as necessities of destiny. From such a perspective they 
deem their brutal conduct nothing but the inevitable 
stream of history, the wave of the future. Against such 
mania, self-decorated with patriotism and "world-mission," 
it is futile to hurl moral preachments. Their education 
has established another level of morality, which scorns our 
own and is impervious to its nobility. Nor can appeals to 
reason be indulged in, for reason has coagulated into 
cruel concepts, which regard decency as weakness. 

"If a subversive psychiatrist had set out to devise the 
optimum system for impregnating the malleable young 
mind with a paranoid set of values, he could have done no 
better than to follow the typical curriculum of the German 
Gymnasium. . . . That it should all culminate in the Nazi 
Weltanschauung is no more astonishing than that a 
vigorous apple-tree should bear fruit in due season." (Dr, 
Richard Brickner, Is Germany Incurable?) 

Merely to imprison and disarm the criminal will not 
deprive him of his criminal urge. Indeed, it often grows 
in intensity under imagined persecution, and while we dis- 
avow revenge, he swears to exact it. All this does not de- 


tract one whit from the necessity of punishing Germany, 
depriving her of sovereignty, and making physically cer- 
tain that she cannot arm again. But if we are to wel- 
come her back into the society of nations, if we are to trust 
her ever again to be a decent citizen of the world we must 
deal with the deeper cause of her criminality, her mis- 
education. It becomes our responsibility to cure the Ger- 
man mind, not for its own sake, but for ours. Of course 
we will not, in any event, risk the chance of another out- 
burst of German fury. But it will make us all uneasy to 
hold our hands ever upon hers in watchful restraint and to 
post sentinels forever on her doorstep. Nor can the recon- 
structed world of commerce and international interchange 
of goods and ideas flourish as well while one of the im- 
portant regions of the world, populated by 60,000,000 effec- 
tives, is chained off with danger signs. 

Germany must be mentally disarmed. Her educational 
system must be dismantled and scrapped, along with her 
munition plants. A new pedagogical plant must be con- 
structed, whose product will be of peaceful nature, and con- 
form to the normal standards of moral intercourse. 

Any lesser resolve can lead only to the conclusion that 
the criminal is incurable and therefore must be forever 
confined or eradicated, his fields strewn with salt. The 
task of rehabilitating German education is not an intru- 
sion upon her rights, or an insult to her feelings. It is 
the hand of medicine extending its cure to the protesting 
patient, to protect her against her own fever, and to guard 
the world against her foaming fury. It is better than the 

The Physician Is Not a Trespasser 

Every suggestion for the re-education of Germany has 
evoked a storm of disapproval. The objectors accept the 


necessity of the task but insist that it cannot be imposed 
from without. Perhaps their view can best be expressed 
in Browning's lines, " 'Tis an awkward thing to play with 
souls, and matter enough to save one's own." The chal- 
lenge is immediately hurled at the United States to explain 
the illiteracy in its midst and to concern itself with its 
own fascist rabble-rousers. It is contended that even if 
German patriotism were not akin to religious fanaticism, 
it would revolt against the imposition of a foreign culture. 
The resentment against an "occupied" school system, it is 
argued, would be at least as great as against an occupied 
Rhine. All the usual arguments against education by com- 
pulsion are advanced. This view sincerely holds that the 
democratic Germans within Germany must undertake this 
problem; that interference by the United Nations would 
inflame the German youth and thus defeat its own purpose. 
Some justify this inevitable resentment, and observe that 
we would react no differently. Others regret it, but reach 
the same conclusion. 

It is the earmark of a difficult problem that any solu- 
tion is open to criticism. But progress cannot wait for per- 
fection, nor be unduly sensitive to chilling words. The 
enormity of the problem, the danger it presents to world 
peace, require firm action. The risk from a blind road is 
often less than that from the journey not begun. For that 
is what the solution of self-education comes to no jour- 
ney. There would be hundreds, perhaps thousands, of 
German democrats who might qualify as teachers, but they 
would be unable to overhaul the entire educational system 
of a hostile nation. We have seen the sabotage methods 
successfully employed by the "patriots" after the first 
World War to make a farce of the trials of criminals, of 
military disarmament and of democratic experiments in 
education. Can we trust them again? Must we not pro- 


tect the genuine democrats in Germany against their 
enemies within? 

The lessons from our past failure have special signifi- 
cance because the conditions we will inherit now will be 
worse a thousandfold. The corruption of the German mind 
has been a continuous, consistent process for centuries. It 
is the deepest tradition of a war-like people. But the 
Nazis have accelerated the process, and tinged it with un- 
wonted fanaticism. They have by their brazenness sub- 
stituted the speedy methods of hysteria for the slow pace 
of conviction. The Nazi youth oozes racial hatreds and 
writhes in superman complexes. Patriotic democrats 
would be regarded with as much enmity as representa- 
tives of the United Nations. In weighing such considera- 
tions there is little to choose between the betrayer at 
home and the conqueror who invades the school. If thin 
distinctions are to be evaluated, the corrupt Nazi youth 
may have more respect for victors than for traitors. 

The real point, however, is that we cannot rely on Ger- 
man self -education any more than on German self-imposed 
disarmament, or German self-rule generally. For one 
thing is certain, if all historical experience is not to be 
ignored, that a people must be conditioned and readied 
for democracy, or its democratic constitution and elabo- 
rate democratic forms will be ineffectual. The argument 
for self-reform assumes that education is a tangential 
problem, which can be trusted to well-meaning Germans. 
It under-estimates the crucial nature of the problem. Here 
we are striking at the very source of the "next" war. We 
are reaching deep into the very origin of the infection 
which continues to ooze its infecting poison throughout the 
body politic. The cause of peace is at stake. If we fail at 
the doorstep of the little schoolhouse, the millions of men 
who were educated to death, and the billions of dollars 


which were burned on the pyres of war, will have been 
wasted. The extensive blue-prints for a peaceful world- 
structure will be defective and the edifice will collapse at 
the first tremors of new patriotic convulsions. 

Quite understandably, there are many who challenge 
our own cultural equipment to grapple with another 
people's "soul." "Arrogance" that is the accusation. 
But there can be humility in undertaking the solution of 
a great problem. It will not be the United States, Great 
Britain or any other nation alone, which sends its educa- 
tors into Germany. It will be the United Nations, acting, 
let us hope, through some permanent supra-national coun- 
cil, which will be charged with the duty. But even if the 
auspices were less international, the objection would be 
invalid. For there is no assumption of superiority in- 
volved. This is not an Olympic contest in which the rela- 
tive intelligence and education of respective populations 
are tested. 

There was less illiteracy in Germany than in any of 
the United Nations. Its program of conquest required 
extensive teaching and studying of other nations' weak- 
nesses. Our task does not involve the three R's but the 
very quality of German education. 

The Teutonic Plague 

There must be a reason for the persistent irrationality 
of German conduct in international affairs. Having diag- 
nosed its origin as biased pedagogy, we must determine 
to set our best minds to work creating a better educa- 
tional system; one devoted to the search for truth; one 
which will make available to Germans forbidden postu- 
lates, without which their minds have been unbalanced; 
one which will inculcate respect for integrity, the ele- 
mentary virtues of peace, kindliness, and decent consid- 


eration for one's fellow man. If the program devised 
is more effective than those existing in the democracies, 
and the opportunity for improvement is of course great, 
then we can adopt it, too, and learn while we teach. In 
any event, one may as well disqualify a great surgeon be- 
cause his gall bladder is bad, as to reject the democracies' 
right to normalize the barbaric pedagogy of Germany be- 
cause they have" ignorance among their own peoples. 

There must be no hesitancy in accepting the burden. 
It is our duty. It is as urgent as our "arrogance" in dis- 
arming Germany, depriving her of sovereignty and plac- 
ing her on probation. If nothing else, it is a self-protec- 
tive measure. We must unwind the German so that he 
will not spring at us again. It is a preventive and de- 
fensive measure, and it derives the fullest justification 
from its service to world peace. We shall send food but 
we must feed the mind, too, with all the nourishing vita- 
mins of a full democratic diet until the patient loses his 
morbidity, his sullen ugliness and, in full mental compre- 
hension, becomes a useful member of society. 

The International University 

The direct supervision of this vast and delicate under- 
taking should be entrusted to an International University. 

Such an institution could have many other functions, 
though its creation would be justified if it performed only 
this one. It should be established in some historically 
neutral place, such as Switzerland. Its faculty should be 
composed of the professors of leading universities, and of 
others who have achieved international recognition in their 
chosen field. The distinction of such an appointment, the 
unlimited opportunities for service, and, last but also least, 
the generous salaries which should be provided, will be 
sufficient lure to attract the intellectual leaders of the 


world. They must be men devoted to the international 
ideal of peace and, while selected so far as possible with a 
view to proportionate representation of the nations of 
the world, they must be above the narrow prejudices of 
nationalism. Here, in the academic sphere, where truth is 
the only idol, we are more likely to achieve impartiality 
than in the political realm. Such a university could truly 
represent the nations of the world and act for them with- 
out fear or political bias. 

Both as to teacher and pupil, the university should be 
open to all races and religions. The student body would 
all be post-graduate; and in short time the pre-eminence of 
such a university would attract the most promising young 
men and women of all nations. The arts and sciences 
could flourish here. But for our immediate purpose it 
should be noted that text-books in all German universities, 
particularly in history and politics, would require the 
imprimatur of the International University. It would have 
jurisdiction to accept, reject or revise all texts pro- 
posed for German schools. If necessary, scholars could 
be commissioned to write such texts. This might insure 
the teaching of historical truths instead of the distorted 
patriotic versions which often find their way into school 
rooms. The impact of accurate historical teaching upon 
the German mind would be great, because it would be a 
direct answer to his training that war is noble and the 
highest expression of man. To insure integrity, the student 
would be encouraged to read and study the distorted works, 
but only after the truth had been demonstrated to him. In 
this way he would be trained in the processes of discrimi- 
nation and develop a healthy skepticism towards his prior 

Courses in humanities, modern civilization, and phil- 
osophy could be mapped out by the authorities of the 


International University to meet the peculiar predisposi- 
tion of the German youth. Democracy would be taught, 
not as a political subject, but as a philosophy of the right 
of man to determine how he shall be governed. 

German literature would be taught with proper em- 
phasis upon all the authors the Nazis disowned. For here 
the German student could find real German greatness, 
revered and admired by all the world. His national 
pride could be legitimately catered to, and an effective 
contrast presented between his former idols, detested by 
humanity, and his new discoveries. Gradually it would 
dawn upon the German student that the hope of National 
Socialism to survive 1000 years was a futile boast un- 
achieved by almost 990 years. But German greatness is 
assured permanent recognition by the very literature 
which he was forbidden to touch. He may sublimate his 
intense nationalism in the discovery of new heroes, real 
ones, who could not have stood so firmly and so long in the 
world of letters, if their feet had been made of clay. 

Experts of the university, gifted in the science of teach- 
ing, would devise the courses, subject matter and methods 
of Germany's schools with the purpose of inculcating a 
healthy democratic spirit and a liberal culture. The most 
brilliant educational administrators would be drafted to 
tear down the strongest pillar of Prussianism and its latest 
model, Nazism, and install a new and revised pedagogical 
system. Obviously such men would have full understand- 
ing of the sensitive psychological factors involved. German 
teachers should be favored whenever qualified. Non- 
German teachers would be selected from all the nations of 
the world. With time, the Teachers' Training School of 
the International University could return its most brilliant 
German students to Germany as teachers. Through them 
the international viewpoint and the democratic ideal would 
percolate to the newer students. An ever strengthening 


cycle of learning and tolerance would be created. Through 
exchange scholarships and professorships, the restricted 
vision of nationalism would be broadened to the inter- 
national view. 

While Germany would be the primary beneficiary of 
such a program, all nations could well profit from it. Per- 
haps German pride would be soothed by this fact. History 
books might cease giving undue emphasis to military 
campaigns, triumphs in war, and the hero worship of 
generals. Such matters would take their proper places in 
the recital of man's emergence from stupid belligerence 
to peace. Wars would not be heralded as mighty achieve- 
ments any more than duelists are praised for avenging an 
insult by a sword thrust, or Indians for scalping their 
enemies. School books might shift emphasis to the co- 
operative activities* of nations such as the Universal 
Postal Union and the International Telegraph Union. 
Sweden and Norway fought three or four sanguinary wars 
each century for a thousand years. Their governments ap- 
pointed a commission of scholars to eliminate from their 
respective text-books any reference which might hurt the 
feelings of a Norwegian or Swede. Denmark and Sweden 
then entered into the same arrangement. The resulting 
good will is out of all proportion to the simplicity and 
ease with which this understanding was effected. 

Invading the German Mind 

If we recognize the importance of educational reform, 
the criticisms against international supervision will ap- 

*If the prosaic must be glorified, let the story be told of how under 
the Convention of 1929 the United States Government undertook to 
protect the safety of life in the North Atlantic lanes, and how all the 
rest of the Atlantic nations contribute to the cost of this ice patrol. 
The United States pays 18% of the expenses, Norway 3% and the 
United Kingdom 4Q%. Other nations bear 39%. 


pear in proper perspective. Also, we will approach the 
task with the imagination, originality and thoroughness 
which the desperateness of the situation impels. One 
must envision something more than improved curricula, 
better texts, saner staffs. We must lavish upon the cam- 
paign at least a fraction of the money and time which the 
"High Command" spent on military operations. We must 
employ all the ingenuity and resourcefulness of which 
radio, motion pictures and skillful educational propa- 
ganda are capable. It is the greatest and noblest task in 
"public relations" ever posed, for it requires the extirpa- 
tion of a whole people's frame of mind and the inculcation 
of a new one. 

The effort would not be limited to the blackboard. All 
the forces of the arsenal for the invasion of the German 
mind must be employed in this noble attack. The church 
would be encouraged to recapture its lost flocks, for religi- 
ous ideals are part of the reconditioning in decency which 
the Germans must regain. 

There is much to be undone. The slogan of the German 
Faith Movement was "The cross must fall if Germany is 
to live." The youth have been reared on Hitler's instruc- 
tion that "conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a blemish 
like circumcision" and Alfred Rosenberg's "Either Chris- 
tian or German ! There is no 'Aryan Christ' and no Chris- 
tian German. They are incompatible." Their religious 
training has come from Bishop Muller who taught : "Mercy 
is an un-German conception, with which we can have 
nothing to do." And when the children marched they 
sang obscene songs such as "Let Christ rot and the Hitler 
youth march." 

The eradication of pagan beliefs would be a step for- 
ward in the healing process. The churches of all denomina- 
tions would of course be pleased to co-operate, and resist- 


ance to them is bound to be feeble among large sections of 
the population. 

The world's clergy would be invited to organize a cam- 
paign against the modern heathen and his ungodly lust for 

"Christianity has not failed/' said Shaw. "It has never 
been tried." 

There is considerable truth in this epigrammatic exag- 
geration. The churches would be invited to make their 
professions of faith a live and practical program. A re- 
ligious renaissance in Germany would be an essential ele- 
ment in the psychiatric release of a tormented people which 
transfers its torment to others. 

The labor unions, reborn from the ashes of fascism, 
should be valuable allies in the re-education program. Cer- 
tainly they have a stake in the creation of a sane German 
economy. Moreover, actual participation in union elec- 
tions may help prepare German workers for the experience 
of intelligent suffrage in a representative republic. 

Education would be made compulsory for old and 
young alike, but it would not always be confined to the 
classroom. The enormous persuasive force of dramatic 
presentation would be fully utilized. Motion pictures could 
here reach their fullest maturity. The greatest writers, 
producers and stars would, under the aegis of the Interna- 
tional University, dramatize the unfathomable wickedness 
of Nazism, and the beauty and simplicity of a Germany no 
longer preoccupied with shooting, marching, shooting and 
marching home defeated. They would be commissioned 
to create a German stage in the image of democracy. And 
the radio, through entertainment and undisguised lecture, 
would invade the home itself. No device for the undoing 
of Nazi training would be ignored nor be beneath our earn- 
est effort. The authors, dramatists, editors and publishers 


would have to pass muster of the International Uni- 
versity. This is consistent, for they are all educators. News 
would be uncensored but at the beginning all non-demo- 
cratic publications would be barred. After the German 
mind had had an opportunity to be strengthened by new 
ideals, it could be subjected to contrary views in the con- 
fidence that it would reject the virus. In the course of 
doing so, it would develop a greater immunity for the 

There would be extensive practice of democratic pro- 
cedure. For democracy is not only a belief but a habit to 
be acquired. School, community, city and national elec- 
tions would be devised in the gradual preparation for self- 
government. The intellectuals, the "better Germans," who, 
according to their apologists, considered it beneath their 
dignity to be concerned with social problems, and forfeited 
the political field to others, must be induced to accept their 
civic responsibility. 

The educational process would pervade all Germany 
and blanket her. All factories would be required to have 
recess periods, during which simplified lectures on democ- 
racy would be given to the workers. The personnel of 
offices would have similar interludes. Citizenship could be 
obtained only by earning an education certificate obtain- 
able by any of alternative educational methods (not 
excluding extensive correspondence courses) to be sanc- 
tioned by the International University. Summer schools 
would be organized everywhere, and part of all vacation 
periods would be required to be spent in them. 

Only when Germans had satisfied the distinguished 
and impartial trustees of the International University 
that they were ready for statehood, and were no longer a 
menace to the world, would they be admitted to the family 
of nations. The probation would then be over. It will be 


up to the Germans to make that probationary period short. 
In the ultimate sense of the word, their fate will be in their 
own hands. 

Every phase of this program will contribute towards 
their emancipation. By depriving them of sovereignty we 
will only have relieved them of the burdens of state for 
which they are now unprepared. By punishing their war 
criminals we will have removed the most violent and re- 
vengeful in their midst, and thus have given them the free- 
dom to reform without the relentless watchfulness of their 
prior overseers. By economic relief and opportunity we 
will have made it possible for them to make restitution and 
pay reparations without exhaustion and collapse, which 
their enormous obligations would ordinarily insure. 

Also there will be their own great disillusionment to 
aid them. The very extremism of Nazism, its absolute cer- 
tainty in victory for the Herrenvolk, its assumption that 
democracies are decadent and cannot fight all this was 
accepted as holy fact. Will their fall wake the Germans 
from the nightmare they have been living? Convictions 
achieved by psychotic logic often survive defeat and actu- 
ally flourish in martyrdom. But may there not be some 
point at which fanaticism and hysteria will be shocked into 
extinction by defeat? 

The psychiatrist confesses that he does not know the 
cause of paranoia, but its symptoms are easily detectable. 
They are grandiose mystic notions, a belief in destiny, an 
exclusive personal right to satisfy ambitions, and a perse- 
cution complex which justifies coldly calculated murder. 
Dr. Richard Brickner (in Is Germany Incurable?) has 
made a most persuasive diagnosis of German conduct as 
mass paranoia with all the symptoms of megalomania, 
sense of mission, fanatic violence and persecution. If the 
analogy is to be pursued, the cure, in those instances where 


it can be effected at all, is to utilize the "clear" area of 
the personality, that which is not subject to paranoid de- 
lusions, and to extend it over the paranoid area. In that 
people, the pro-democratic Germans constitute the clear 
area. By associating their beliefs with normal patriotism, 
pride, and economic benefits, while removing from their 
midst the most fanatical, we may gradually extend the 
clear area to a controlling majority of Germans. 

Nevertheless, having seen the depth of the rotten struc- 
ture, we need have no illusions about the excavating prob- 
lem and the difficulties of building a new democratic 
edifice. There will be contemptuous compliance, sullen 
inattention and bold defiance. But these moods will be 
part of the problem, and must be treated by understanding 
experts with detachment. By persistence and endless 
repetition the masses of the Germans must be started on a 
new tradition. Prussian training must be forever abol- 

The German will have to learn that Der Tag is every- 
one's day, that the warmth of the sun, the wheat from the 
field, and joy of family and comradeship belong to all. In 
sharing them, they are preserved for each of us. 




Now the time has come to study the ever-widening cir- 
cles. It should be observed that the plan for Germany en- 
visioned, not without prayerful hope, an international 
community. While theoretically the plan might be work- 
able if it were applied by the group action of the victors, 
it would be preferable if the supervision were supra- 
national rather than merely national. For we have seen 
that international co-operation is equally essential in the 
economic, educational and political spheres. 

The Mysticism of Sovereignty 

What is the major obstacle to vesting authority in a 
supra-national organization? It is the doctrine of sover- 
eignty, which refuses to accede to the interests of inter- 
national law and order. 

Perhaps we shall learn from the extreme German 
illustration that excessive nationalism and the full pre- 
rogatives of sovereignty are not essential to a people's wel- 
fare. Few topics are so ahead of the times as this. Its 
unpopularity must therefore be taken for granted. But a 
few reflections would not be amiss. 

Originally it was difficult to divest the clans and the 
families of their "sovereignty" and combine them into a 
community. It took ages to persuade the clan of its new 


loyalty to a larger group. Clan "patriotism" beat the 
demagogic drums. "Shall we be subject to the will of 
foreign groups? What about our family and our tradi- 
tions?" But as society advanced and became more com- 
plex, the necessity for the joint action of neighboring clans 
overcame natural jealousies. The nation-state gradu- 
ally came into existence and proceeded to develop the 
doctrine of sovereignty. To a great extent this was done 
in self-defense. It was a shield against the claims of the 
Papacy and of the Holy Roman Empire. No outside di- 
rection could be tolerated, argued the chiefs of state, be- 
cause each nation had sovereign rights, which were 
pre-eminent. It was a sort of Monroe Doctrine for the 
independence of each political entity. 

The nation-state then sought to overcome the friction 
among its several groups by preaching patriotism and by 
substituting national pride for group pride. This was a 
useful device for unification. The United States employed 
it after the Revolutionary and Civil Wars. But the virtues 
of loyalty and love for country soon exceeded normal 
bounds. Poets, orators, lawyers, and philosophers gilded 
the lily until it blinded us. All sorts of mystical proper- 
ties were claimed for sovereignty. It became a supreme 
and ineffable being in itself. It developed its own will, 
residing in a super-organism called the state. A nation 
ceased to be merely an organization to carry on the busi- 
ness of its citizens. It became an entity with its own des- 
tiny, its own desires, as though it existed entirely apart 
from its citizens. Nationalism became an ideal in itself, and 
patriotism the fanatical devotion to it. A sort of religious 
aura hovered over the subject and the consequent loyalty 
depended on faith, not reason. "My country, right or 
wrong, but my country!" 


The Nazis of course developed nationalism to its ulti- 
mate extent. The state became a sort of mythical god 
which owned its subjects and exacted every conceivable 
sacrifice for the service of its own "will." Nazism sought 
only one loyalty, to replace all other loyalties. Its aspira- 
tion was medieval unity of devotion without reservation. 
The Nazi developed sovereignty into a Frankensteinian 
monster, over which no person had control. It was merely 
to be served blindly. 

To a lesser degree, the notion of sovereignty as held 
by the democracies is also an outworn extremism. For 
a nation should not be an entity entirely independent 
of external control. The rights of other nations should 
be a restriction upon it. But the "theology" of sovereignty 
denies this simple truth. It insists upon each state's om- 
nipotence, which makes impossible any real co-opera- 
tion in a supra-natioaal organization. None of the 
members of the League of Nations would modify its 
sovereignty to the slightest extent. Unanimous vote 
was necessary for any important decision. In other 
words, it was a voluntary society, without any real obli- 
gation whatsoever on the part of its members. None would 
whittle away the prerogatives of sovereignty. The United 
States considered its sovereignty so sacrosanct that it 
would not even risk the persuasion which might result 
from League balloting. The Versailles Treaty constructed 
new states, granting each its own untouchable sovereignty. 
Since the League of Nations had no power to affect the 
sovereignty of any state, the clash of nationalisms was 
actually increased. 

Today, the fact is that few activities of a state are 
wholly confined within its frontiers. Each nation is in- 
terdependent with other nations. There is no actual na- 
tional independence in an industrial, commercial or finan- 


cial sense. Forces beyond our borders determine our 
health and economic condition. Even jurists are turn- 
ing to a theory of international law built upon the legal 
supremacy of the law of nations. "What cries out for un- 
derstanding is that modern technology and business or- 
ganization have woven humanity into a community. Man's 
political organization still lags behind." (P. E. Corbett, 
Post-War Worlds) We are approaching the new con- 
cept gingerly, through Universal Telegraph and Postal 
Unions, the International Bank of Settlement, the Per- 
manent Court of International Justice and the Interna- 
tional Labor Organization. But we are far from having 
stripped the pretensions from the doctrine of sovereignty. 
Some brilliant thinkers, like Walter Lippmann, pro- 
pose a British- American alliance rather than an Inter- 
national Society, in order to avoid relinquishing sov- 
ereignty in the slightest degree. And when the nationalists 
attack even such an alliance on the ground that our 
sovereignty would be compromised, his answer is an apolo- 
getic explanation that there would be "consultation" and, 
therefore, there is likely to be "agreement" in each in- 
stance. Our sovereignty, he assures us, will be unsullied. 
Indeed, it will be preserved and strengthened by the ad- 
vantages flowing from the pact. Thus it is proposed that 
we go back to old-fashioned military alliances, with all 
the acknowledged evils they present in inciting rival al- 
liances, with all the consequent tug and pull of balances of 
power, all to avoid tarnishing the bright luster of the sov- 
ereignty doctrine. It does not matter that the alliance 
proposed is wise and benevolent, nor that it may be the 
first practical step toward a genuine association of na- 
tions, to whose limited sphere of authority over interna- 
tional peace all nations will be subordinated. The fact 
remains that public opinion is still unprepared for the full 


evolution of the state into the superstate, and that by- 
paths must be cautiously taken, if the destination is to be 
approached at all. 

Patriotism, which is the affection for the great- 
ness of one's nation is a natural as well as noble im- 
pulse. It has, however, been distorted into chauvinism, 
and derives its power from an exaggerated notion of sov- 
ereignty. Sooner or later we will learn that, in our com- 
plex world, the yielding of some of our sovereignty is es- 
sential to the preservation of peace. Many nations know 
now that in guarding their sovereignty too zealously, they 
were left alone to be devoured by the ravenous German 
wolf. The story of the collapse of collective security is 
a tale of national prima donnas, too smug and self-suf- 
ficient to cooperate. 

There are undoubtedly many, very many, who would 
view any restriction upon national sovereignty with out- 
raged patriotism and who would spring to heroic pos- 
tures ready to forfeit their lives for their misguided loyalty. 
Such thalamism is the motive power for war. It is na- 
tional emotion out of control. To those who cannot take 
the first step of organization to peace, the second, that of 
a supra-national police force, is of course even more of- 
fensive. They calmly accept legal restraints upon the in- 
dividual, but ascribe such different moral standards to 
the state that it becomes superior to the application of 
legal force. They can even swallow the resort to illegal 
force called war. They sometimes preach its inevitability, 
if not its necessity, but they are unable to conceive of 
legal force applied to an offending nation. 

Regional Federalism 

The citizen of New York or California looks for security 
not only to his state but to the nation. He cherishes his 


national citizenship at least as much as his membership in 
the state or local community. But the addition of another 
loyalty, to a commonwealth of nations, seems to be a for- 
bidding psychological transition. 

The "logical" reasons offered by such opposition reveal 
its bias. For example, much is made about "our boys 
travelling to the far ends of the earth" to police some re- 
gion, but no objection is made to the necessity, even dur- 
ing peace, of a huge navy which constantly sends "our 
boys" to remote waters. The professional soldier of an in- 
ternational police force would accept travel as part of 
his duty. Civilians would have a better chance of being 
spared an unwanted trip, if there were an international 
control and sufficient force to make control effective. 

After all, the United States itself is a successful federa- 
tion of states, among whom there was war only 80 years 
ago. The Constitution, viewed in the light of the current 
controversy, is an amazing document. The proud and 
sovereign states, Virginia, New York and the rest, gave up 
their inalienable rights to fight each other, wage trade wars, 
and levy taxes on exports. The United States Supreme 
Court in its jurisdiction over the controversies of sovereign 
states is the first example of an international court in his- 
tory. From this very limited precedent, others have pro- 
posed broader experiments. Their hope is by gradualism 
to reach a World Federation. 

Lionel Curtis, in Civitas Dei, has proposed a grouping 
of Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand. Clarence 
Streit, in Union Now, urges a larger federation of 15 
nations (the United States, Great Britain, Canada, France, 
Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Nether- 
lands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and the 
Union of South Africa). Most functions would be pre- 
served for the individual nations, but citizenship, defense, 


international trade, currency, and communications would 
be controlled by the Union. A bicameral legislature, ex- 
ecutive board, prime minister, cabinet and high court are 
provided as the federal organs. The representation would 
be based on population, in one house of the legislature, and 
on a minimum-plus-population basis in the other branch 
of the legislature. 

These and other regional plans (such as Count Couden- 
hove-Kalergi's) are the gropings of a distraught world 
towards a goal not immediately obtainable. They are 
to be distinguished from an international League of Na- 
tions, which recognizes the absolute sovereignty of each 
state, and is therefore unworkable. These proposals at 
least envision a surrender of certain sovereign functions in 
the interest of world peace. Their educational and psycho- 
logical value is considerable, for the consideration of such 
suggestions prepares public opinion for the new and shock- 
ing idea. Patriotism may thereby discover that there is no 
inconsistency between affection for one's country and alle- 
giance to the constellation of states of which it is part. 
Indeed, when one views the suffering which each country 
is compelled to undergo periodically, the sacrifice of a por- 
tion of sovereign exclusiveness is a cheap price to pay for 
national security. 

Lincoln once stated the case for that higher patriotism 
which does not falter at an untried concept. "The dogmas 
of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The 
occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with 
the occasion. As our case is new, so must bethink anew 
and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then 
we shall save our country." 

Some have criticized regional federalism and have 
urged the attainment of the ultimate step in one bold leap. 
"A world federation or a world state is the feasible 


political structure of a universal civilization. The less 
mankind experiments with ersatz or artificial solutions of 
regionalism, the sooner it will attain security and peace," 
wrote Nicholas Doman in The Coming Age of World Con- 
trol. But in choosing between the possibility of complete 
failure because of popular apprehensiveness, and partial 
success, is not the latter the wiser course? 

We may be sure that the evolution of international fed- 
eration is gradually taking place. Dynastic wars brought 
about monarchical states. National wars were instru- 
mental in shaping national states. Now world wars are 
accelerating the movement toward world-wide organiza- 

The fierce flames of war make us stand at a distance 
and hide from some of us the melting processes going on 
within. Our attention is riveted on the battle and we may 
not be aware that some of the instruments being forged 
for combat will have utility in peace. The nationalist 
jealousies of the military leaders and armies have been 
overcome in an unprecedented manner. General Dwight 
Eisenhower, General Douglas MacArthur and Lord Louis 
Mountbatten command armies of many nations. Joint con- 
ferences shape political and military plans. The traditional 
military hierarchy, whose supreme authority stemmed 
from nationalism, now is disciplined to international lead- 
ership. This is an advance over the most difficult sector 
of the entire front. It is an approach to the International 
Police Force such as one would not have dared anticipate 
ten years ago. 

Similarly, regional political constellations are be- 
ing formed, their orbit determined by the hazards of 
war. Churchill during a war crisis offered to join 
France and England into one nation. Similar trends are 
observed in Scandinavia and in the Balkans. The Czech 


and Polish governments in exile have discussed post-war 
federation of their two nations. The Italians have pro- 
posed a Latin bloc. The Pan-American community has 
progressed through the Montevideo Conference in 1933, 
the agreement at Buenos Aires in 1936, and the agreement 
at Lima in 1938, all founded upon the system of settlement 
of inter-American disputes devised in 1929. The settle- 
ment of the Bolivia-Paraguay conflict by joint pressure 
of the informal "federation" was an illustration of the 
potential power of regional organization. In August, 
1940, the President of the United States and the Prime 
Minister of Canada made the Ogdensburg agreement, set- 
ting up a Joint Defense Board for their two countries. 

These are far from constitutional federations but they 
indicate the pressure of historical development. Above 
all other tendencies is the closely knit, unified conduct of 
Great Britain and the United States, pooling economic re- 
sources, armies, weapons, and political purpose in one 
grand strategy. Together with China and Kussia, they 
could well constitute the ties among the regional federa- 
tions. Here too, the portents are favorable and in the 
same direction. The "Big Four", the United States, Brit- 
ain, Kussia and China recently revised the United Nations 
Relief and Rehabilitation Administration to include 
forty of their smaller colleagues. It created a policy- 
making Council consisting of one member from each of 
the nations ultimately participating in it, and a Central 
Committee consisting of one representative of each of the 
"Big Four". The Council will act by a majority vote of 
all its members, big and little. It will appoint a Director 
General on the unanimous recommendation of the Central 
Committee. Between sessions of the Council, this Central 
Committee "shall, when necessary, make policy decisions 
of an emergency character," but all such decisions "shall 


be open to reconsideration by the Council at any regular 
session or at any special session." 

Here is a fine structure for post-war organization. Its 
massive lines and practical detail should comfort those 
who fear that it will be impossible to translate into actu- 
ality the wraith-like designs of unpracticed world archi- 

Forever Hold Tour Peace 

Thus the ideal of a world supra-national organization 
can be perceived in the distance, even if dimly. Perhaps 
the prophetic words written by Victor Hugo on the walls 
of the Palais de Vosges in Paris will still come true, "I 
am a party, a party which does not exist yet. A party of 
revolution civilization. This party will make the twenti- 
eth century, out of which first the United States of Europe 
and later the United States of the World will emerge." 

The usual taunts will be hurled: "starry-eyed ideal- 
ism," "visionary schemes," "impractical dreams" and all 
the worn-out cliches composed by those practical, hard- 
headed men who have been unable to stop the world's 
descent into the chasm of darkness. They are "experts", 
thoroughly disqualified by the greatest failure in history. 
They have lost the privilege of derisive criticism and 
superior airs. In the test-tube of history, it was their 
"realism" which proved to be starry-eyed and impracti- 
cable. The torch which fell from their inept hands is 
extinguished. We must light it again with courage and 
daring. There is little to lose. We inherit from them a 
desolate world, ravaged and wracked with agony. Their 
feeble echoes which follow us with warnings of imprac- 
ticability and impossibility are the last groans of defeat- 
ism. We must not heed them. The world has always strug- 
gled against the detractors of progress. Our valor in this 


critical period of man's history must include a disregard 
for these prophets of disaster. If the global slaughter- 
house which they have created is "keeping one's feet on the 
ground", we may well aspire to put our heads in the 




Perhaps this chapter should have been the first. It is 
an introduction an introduction to peace for tomorrow. 
But it is placed here because its considerations may be 
most critically observed in such light as may be cast by 
the preceding pages. 

Three methods have been used in the search for a 
solution to the German problem. First, we have proceeded 
from analysis of particular situations to general conclu- 
sions rather than vice versa. A prescription for world 
peace was not devised and then applied to Germany. 
Bather, the German problem has been studied, and from it 
broader deductions have been made for world peace. This 
method was adopted not only because Germany is a unique 
and explosive element in world disequilibrium, but also 
because, by limiting the original scope of inquiry, concen- 
trated analysis was made possible. The temptation for 
sweeping generalization was diminished. Specific problems 
reared their troublesome heads and demanded attention. 
A speck, sufficiently close to the eye, will shut out the stars. 

Second, we have adopted the historical approach. 
The Versailles Treaty, and German and Allied conduct 
have been examined, to deduce the present recommenda- 
tions. History may repeat itself, but it is rare for the 
differentiating factors to be so few as in the case of the 


two World Wars. By close examination of prior events 
we are actually afforded the opportunity of hindsight as 
to the future! Here, far more than in the ordinary case, 
the study of history has not been merely an academic 
indulgence. It has afforded a .prescience, to be eagerly 
grasped by one confronted with the German enigma. That 
is why so much attention has been lavished upon the events 
of the past. Even the boldest and most original thinking 
must be tempered by its lessons. 

We saw how Germany, though manacled and appar- 
ently tied hand and foot, performed a magical escape from 
the war-guilt trials of the Versailles Treaty. Now that we 
know about the fake knots and the loose handcuffs, the 
jail will not be cheated again. We studied the fraudulent 
bookkeeping entries of reparations, the secretion of assets,, 
and the clever manipulations by which the disarmament 
provisions were nullified. Our understanding makes this 
deception no longer possible. Nor have we overlooked the 
fact that, just as a corporation which commits a crime may 
be dissolved and its charter forfeited, so a criminal nation 
must lose its charter of sovereignty. 

We have, like good probation officials, traced the case 
history of the criminal and found a corrupt educational 
background running back many generations. Now we 
know that reform school is essential, and that particular 
attention must be given to special curricula, adequate to 
correct the inculcation of false moral principles. We have 
realized that the educational program must be devised not 
by local politicians but by academic authorities of the 
highest standing the International University. 

Having observed that an environment of poverty and 
hopelessness prevents a psychology of penitence and re- 
form, we have provided for a favorable economic condi- 
tioning of the defective. In all this, history has acted as 


a sign-post pointing the direction its inscriptions filled 
with significant instruction. 

Third, we have permitted the facts to shape the 
recommendations, even if the results appeared incon- 
sistent. Most peace plans for Germany fall into definite 
categories. There is the so-called "sob-sister" plan preach- 
ing generosity and forgiveness. At the other extreme is 
the "kill them" plan with its "eye for an eye" philosophy. 
But wisdom does not fall into prearranged classifications. 
It has no concern with consistency. We have seen that 
the Germans must be treated with severity insofar as 
punishment, restitution, and preventive measures are 
concerned, but with generosity in the economic sphere. 
For education, neither method is appropriate. Paradoxi- 
cally enough, in this realm there must be a severe appli- 
cation of a generous principle. Life is not a contest 
between "schools of thought" with a convenient decision 
rendered at the end of the bout. I have endeavored to 
permit the conclusions, as well as the chips, to fall where 
they may, without regard to the unevenness of the pattern. 

Good painters learn to be faithful to what they see. 
The lines actually observed may seem impossible but the 
net eft'ect, if one has the courage to draw them, is a proper 
perspective. The amateur fears the apparent distortion 
and "corrects" the line so that it will represent his knowl- 
edge rather than his observation. His logic is sound but 
his conclusion is false. This is often true in philosophical 
planning. The proper solution for Germany may, accord- 
ing to the logic of consistency, be either wrath or mercy. 
Actually the lines are not to be drawn so neatly. They 
curve and break irregularly as complex forces move them. 
The suggested irregularities of the lines are not compro- 
mises. They are true to observation. It is to be hoped 
that the result is in perspective. 


Program Summarized 

The laborious struggle of man towards a happier ex- 
istence has overcome many superstitions, prejudices and in- 
justices. One nation, however, can seize civilization as it 
climbs slowly upwards and drag it down through the cen- 
turies to barbarism. Germany has chosen this pagan role 
with a persistence and venom which has confounded all 
men of good will. We resolve solemnly that she must not 
do so again. We back that profound determination with a 


Having determined where the responsibility rests, we 
apply the sword of justice in all its measured impartial 

First, we forfeit Germany's sovereignty as a nation, to 
be restored if, and when, she ceases to be a menace to the 
society of peoples. We have provided how that decision 
shall be made. 

Second, having punished the nation as an entity, we 
punish her individual war criminals. For this purpose we 
construct two kinds of courts. Those of each nation in 
which the criminals may be found, or national courts 
(military and criminal), will apply their own laws and 
provide their own prosecutors, prisons, probation depart- 
ments and insane institutions. The second kind is the 
international court (with its criminal and military sub- 
sidiaries) to act as a final appellate court and also to 
try "sovereigns" and other important criminals. The 
armistice itself will require the immediate surrender for 
trial of all war criminals. Their names and the accusa- 
tions against them will in many instances be annexed to 


the armistice terms. Also all official documents and 
evidentiary data mnst be produced intact. 

Third, international commissions as well as national 
commissions should gather the abundant data of crimi- 
nality under the immediate direction of the prosecutors. 

Fourth, we list bureaucratic groups of Pan-Germans 
from which the officially organized brutality stemmed. 
They must be the first to face an inexorable avenging jus- 
tice. These, the upper crust of Nazism, the Leader, Cabinet 
and Gauleiters, the High Command, the Gestapo, the 
Sturm Abteilung, the Labor Front, the German Peoples' 
Courts, the Schutzstaffel and others must be exterminated 
according to law. 

Fifth, we have recommended how certain troublesome 
questions of International Law should be answered such 
as the defense that a superior officer's command was being 

Sixth, we have proposed measures to prevent the guilty 
from obtaining asylum in neutral countries. 

Despite a most extensive judicial system constituted in 
the Versailles Treaty Germany evaded any real punish- 
ment. We have studied the ingenious methods which she 
employed so successfully. Our program shuts the door to 
such cunning. The Prussian war cult and its Nazi high 
executioners must be destroyed. Justice demands it. Hope 
for a better world requires it. 

Economic Program 

The punishment provisions spill over into the economic 
realm. This is quite natural, since the complex forces of 
society will not be confined to labeled compartments. Life 
is stormy and unorthodox, and no respecter of the plan- 


ner's well-carved designs. The economic program has two 
main directions, one preventive and punitive, the other 

The former is designed to disarm Germany economically 
as well as militarily. It proposes : 

First, that all plants and machinery which produce war 
material be scrapped, removed or demolished. 

Second, that the machine tool industry, steel mills, 
power houses and important "heavy industries" be de- 
stroyed or taken from German control. While physical 
operation could be left to Germans, international trustees 
should determine personnel of management, contracts, in- 
vestments and foreign arrangements. There would be no 
reliance upon mere "inspection." Control of policy itself 
would be attained. No cartel arrangements could then be 
made to restrict foreign production of vital materials. Nor 
could fifth columns of sabotage and espionage be organized 
under the respectable guise of business enterprise. 

Third, that stocks of metals, oil or other strategic war 
materials in excess of normal domestic consumption be re- 
moved from the country and never replenished. 

Fourth, that restitution be made of stolen property 
wherever possible. We have analyzed the different methods 
by which it was illegally obtained. They range from loot- 
ing by military marauders called WiRti to the "acquisi- 
tion of title" by devious frauds such as the Soldaten- 
lanken. Through one form or another the Germans have 
made the greatest haul in the history of banditry, almost 
50 billion dollars. 

Fifth, that property courts, with criminal jurisdiction 
to punish recalcitrants, shall determine disputes over title 


to property. The accumulations of the Nazis, no matter 
in what form or country, will be confiscated and pooled 
for restoration to the victims or their governments. The 
devices for dressing these embezzlements with color of title 
will be pierced. We have analyzed some of the fraudulent 
methods which merely disguise the robberies. 

Sixth, that reparations be paid in money and goods to 
the fullest extent of Germany's capacity. However, the 
obligation will be elastic, and exacted under the control of 
an International Economic Board which will (a) prevent 
the collapse of German economy through exhaustion and 
(b) prevent damage to the world's markets by dumping 
of goods or otherwise. We have analyzed the cunning 
employed by Germany to avoid making reparation pay- 
ments and at the same time receive huge loans. The plan 
proposed will make the victors the beneficiaries, not the 
victims, of reparations. 

Seventh, that reparations also be paid in the form of 
labor battalions to reconstruct devastated areas. These 
are to be composed chiefly of war criminals sentenced to 
prison terms. This payment shall also be subject to the 
International Board's control in order to avoid injury to 
the restored area by importation of excess labor. 

This program will not only destroy the German war 
plant, but will remove the mortar and bricks without which 
a new one cannot be built. It provides for thorough eco- 
nomic disarmament and it has been carefully designed to 
check the unscrupulous manipulations and recuperative 
powers of German war planners (businessmen as well as 
military men). German fanaticism must be stripped 
naked and kept naked, so that its irrationality and shame 
will be evident to all. It must not be permitted to acquire 
another coat of armor and pose for all the world as a 


brave knight and warrior. At the same time, the program 
is intended to do simple justice by restitution. 

The second phase of the economic program is not puni 
tive though it may have preventive effects. It is chiefly 
designed to serve the economic health and growth of 
Germany. It provides : 

First, that it share in the immediate food relief which 
will be extended to all Europe during the emergency pe- 
riod following the armistice. An extensive international 
commission has already worked out plans for succor. Ger 
many must also be a full participant in medical aid. As 
it is our intention to eradicate Germany's mass paranoiac 
tendencies, we must create a favorable physical condi- 
tion to aid her mental reorientation. Her persecution 
complex must not be aggravated by hunger and economic 
distress. For these, unlike punishment, become widespread 
and are inflicted upon innocent and guilty alike. We have 
talked of the guilt of the German people, always conscious 
of the many individual exceptions. In the economic phase 
of our program the exception determines the rule. Every 
consideration is extended to improve the standard of 
living in Germany. 

Second, that Prussian estates be confiscated and dis- 
tributed to German peasants in small parcels. The feudal 
class in Germany, an anachronism which still survives, 
would thus be eliminated. Such agrarian reform would 
put an end to the intolerable domination of Germany by 
land -owning Junkers, and their arrogant military and 
nationalistic creeds. It would end the Prussian reign, 
which terrorized the better instincts of many Germans. 
It would improve and democratize German economy. 

Third, that Germany be in full proportion the benefici- 
ary of international economic planning and control. We 


have suggested an Economic Council snch as was designed 
in February, 1940, at the Hague. The following economic 
benefits could be conferred on Germany as well as other 
nations: (a) a Central Bank would raise or lower inter- 
est rates simultaneously in all countries, to increase or 
limit finances for production, (b) regional resources would 
be developed, (c) labor supply would be adjusted to local 
requirements through the relaxation or tightening of im- 
migration restrictions, (d) exchange rates would be 
stabilized by fixing the price of gold in each currency 
periodically, (e) a stabilization fund would check distress 
due to the withdrawal of short-term capital, (f) quotas 
and restrictions on international trade would be removed 
except in special circumstances, (g) tariffs would be en- 
couraged chiefly for infant industries, (h) cartels would 
be subjected to the scrutiny of a sort of international 
S.E.O. to be sure that they were in the public's interest, 
(i) new, peaceful industries might be assigned to German 
efficiency or to other countries in accordance with the 
economic advantages resulting from the location of 
certain materials or resources. 

These and similar activities would satisfy the pledge 
of the Atlantic Charter "to farther the enjoyment by all 
States, great or small, victor or vanquished, of access on 
equal terms to the trade and to the raw materials of the 
world which are needed for their economic prosperity." 

Germany will be restored to economic health and 
standards. She will learn from this living course in po- 
litical economy that war devours wealth more quickly 
than it supplies loot. Impoverishment is the common de- 
nominator of victory and defeat. Perhaps this will be 
some encouragement toward a peaceful frame of mind. 
Certainly it will aid world economy. But the German 
obsession with world domination is not to be disposed of 


so easily. Economic justice is essential to the plan for 
re-education, but it is not the education itself. The effort 
in this direction is as ambitious as the size of the problem 
requires. It is designed to condition Germany for a right- 
ful place in a peaceful society. 

Educational Program 
This phase of the program provides: 

First, that the entire educational system of Germany 
be scrapped, just as its arms factories must be. The mental 
products it has produced have been no less dangerous to 
mankind than the other varieties of explosives from its 
munition plants. 

Second, that the task of obliterating the false doctrines 
of German nationalism is not to be entrusted solely to the 
Germans. They have been immersed in vicious credos 
for many generations, and the Nazis have accelerated the 
process with hysteria. We have seen the degenerative 
educational processes unmolested after the first World 
War, when the problem was left to German solution. 
Noble resolutions went as unheeded as solemn assurances 
of disarmament. The price of failure was a second World 
War. The matter cannot again be left to German self- 

Third, that the educational program be effectuated un- 
der international auspices. If a supra-national authority 
is created, it would afford the most appropriate and least 
biased supervision. Otherwise, the United Nations would 
be charged with the task, just as they must accept the re- 
sponsibility of the other phases of the program. The most 
suitable agency to devise the details of the educational re- 
form, such as the curricula of the schools, the selection of 
teachers and text-books, and pedagogical matters generally, 


would be an International University. We have outlined 
the structure, function and authority of such an institu- 
tion. It would be the "High Command" of the educational 
offensive. All German text-books must bear the impri- 
matur of the International University. Outstanding Ger- 
man students would be offered the opportunity of post- 
graduate courses in the International University. They 
would return to Germany as teachers, to found a new 
cultural tradition infused with an international civic 
sense. A new cycle of normal nationalism would be be- 
gun, whose expression would be Germany's contribution 
to the welfare and peace of Europe. 

Fourth, that the professors, wherever possible, should 
be German liberals and democrats. Others will be chosen 
internationally. We have considered the irritation of 
"foreign" intrusion. It must be reduced to its minimum, 
but it must never become the reason for abandoning con- 
trol. We have studied the disastrous effects of the last 
experiment in autonomous educational reform. 

Fifth, that the revitalization of a democratic culture 
be implemented by every conceivable instrument for in- 
vading the mind. We have outlined the possible function 
in this respect of the church, the motion picture, the 
theatre, the radio, the press, and the labor unions. 

There will be educational service instead of military 
service, and every German will be under compulsion to 
become prepared for his peaceful duty as once he was for 
his martial one. 

Sixth, that the extensive educational program will have 
for one of its main objects training in democratic self- 
rule. If and when the German people are, in the impartial 
judgment of the International University, prepared for 
their proper place in the society of nations, they will be 


welcomed to their new obligation. No more will they be 
deemed a menace. Their sovereignty will be restored. Their 
redemption quite properly will come through the mind. 
For only when their intentions and viewpoints are normal 
will the physical safeguards against them become unneces- 

Harvesting the Peace 

Any architect of peace should be awed by the stupen- 
dous nature of his task. Wisdom is given to none of us to 
rebuild the world. No neat blue-print can possibly be 
given without grievous defect. Humility therefore flows, 
not from any ordinary springs of modesty, but from a genu- 
ine sense of inadequacy to solve by formula the most trou- 
blesome threat to man's existence. But humility can have 
two effects. It can induce passivity, which is cowardice, 
or it can inspire courage to propose, devoid of messianic 

One peers anxiously upwards for the next rung in man's 
ascent and the tightness with which the rung is grasped 
does not really indicate full confidence that it will support 
the weight. Vehemence in the course of exposition OP 
persuasion often only hides uncertainty. We assure our- 
selves, by insisting to others, but we may feel rewarded 
if from the much that is offered, something is of value. 

This program of what to do with Germany is an effort 
to meet this test; to preserve man's normal life from the 
violence of a chronic assailant; and after due punishment 
and prophylactic measures have conditioned the offender, 
to accept him into the family of nations. 

Belief in the forces of destiny has been man's most 
costly superstition. Throughout the centuries it has stimu- 
lated aberrations which have wrought havoc with mankind. 
Every kind of savagery has been committed in its name. 


The tyrant and war maker imagines himself merely the 
pliant agent of "the wave of the future" and his evil thus 
derives sanction from an incontestable source. 

This substitution of "mission" for morals, has been the 
most tragic fact in man's decline. It is the negation of all 
ethics, and stunts the idealism of religion. It is no acci- 
dent that Germany and Japan prattle continuously about 
their destiny, their fate. They have substituted an image 
which they have created, for the image of God. Their ob- 
session is real to them; from its hollow depths spring 
fanaticism, which is no less dangerous because it is a con- 
viction about a myth. 

We are not twigs, swept helplessly down the stream of 
life by turbulent waters. The neuter concept of man is 
the real atheism of our lives. There is destiny only in the 
sense that we are masters of it and can shape it. We can- 
not absolve ourselves from wrong or failure by blaming 
the forces beyond us. There is no escape from responsi- 
bility for what we do. The strength to face this is the 
supreme test of our adequacy. 

So in the course of events the critical time comes when 
man must seize the helm and stop pretending that the aim- 
lessness of the ship is the design of the waves. If we must 
steady ourselves with fantasies, let them be healthy ones. 
Let us imagine that the young men some of us knew, who 
cut short their precious lives so that we might plan, hover 
near us now to plead for the full span of life of today's 
children. Let us remember that the next generation, and 
the next, and next is in our care. In a certain sense we 
have become the custodians of the future. The convulsions 
of our time have made it so. 

A cartographer can record the broad expanses of the 
world upon a single map, giving us a perspective of the 
peaks and valleys of the terrain. If there were a similar 


science for creating a map to reduce the ages of time to a 
single surface, a few days would stand mountain-high in 
the story of emancipation. 

Such a day was June 23, 1215, when William d'Albini, 
Stephen Langton and their associates met on the trian- 
gular plain of Runnymede, in a quiet corner of the 160 
acres of pasture land, and exacted the written promise 
from King John that "no freeman shall be seized, or im- 
prisoned . . . except by the legal judgment of his peers, or 
by the laws of the land." This was the day of the Magna 
Carta, which in Blackstone's words was the "gradual muta- 
tion and final establishment of the Charter of Liberties." 

Such a day was September 12, 1787, when at a closed 
session in Independence Hall, Gouverneur Morris reported 
on behalf of a committee on "Style and Arrangement" the 
final draft of the Constitution of the United States. 

Such a day is upon us now. All mankind will have 
cause for many centuries to look upon it and judge whether 
we missed or met its historic challenge. 

We must not fail. 






CORA HODSON: Human Sterilization Today (Watts & Co., London, 1934) 

LEON FRADLEY WHITNEY : The Case for Sterilisation (Frederick A. Stokes 
Co., 1934) 

THEODORE N. KAUFMAN : Germany Must Perish .(Argyle Press, Newark, 
N. J., 1941) 

GEORG WILHELM FRIEDRICH HEGEL: Philosophy of Mind (London, 1894; 
Philosophy of Right (London, 1896) 

JOHANN GOTTLIEB FICHTE: The Destination of Man (1889) ; The Science of 
Rights (2d ed., 1889) ; The Science of Ethics Based on the Science of 
Knowledge (1897) 

FREIDRICH WILHELM FOERSTER: Europe and the German Question (Sheed 
& Ward, 1941) 

Aller Welt (1938) 

HERBERT HOOVER and HUGH GIBSON: The Problems of Lasting Peace 
(Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1942) 

EARNEST A. HOOTON : Interview on Outbreeding (PM, Jan. 4, 1943) 
JOHN ROY CARLSON: Under Cover (E. P. Button & Co., 1943) 
MICHAEL SAYERS and A. E. KAHN : Sabotage (Harper & Bros., 1942) 
HUGH DALTON: Hitler's War (Oxford, 1940) 

WINSTON CHURCHILL: The Great War 1914-1918 (G. Newnes Ltd., Lon- 
don, 1933-1934) 

RAY STANNARD BAKER: Woodrow Wilson and World Settlement (Double- 
day, Doran & Co., 1922) 

RAY STANNARD BAKER and WILLIAM DODD: The Public Papers of Wood- 
row Wilson (Harper & Bros., 1925-1927) 

BISMARCK: Autobiography (New York, 1899) 

MORITZ BUSCH : Secret Papers of Bismarck (New York, 1899) 

A. ASHLEY: Social Policy of Bismarck (New York, 1913) 


"How Europeans Have Been Uprooted", Christian Science Monitor (Oct. 
1, 1943) 

SISLEY HUDDLESTON: "Evacuate the Rhineland" (The New Republic, March 
3, 1927) 

GEORGE W. HERALD: "Sex as a Nazi Weapon" (American Mercury, June, 

T. H. TETENS : Whither Hitler? (Basel, 1935) 

BORIS SHUB: Starvation Over Europe (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New 
York, 1943) 

INSTITUTE OF JEWISH AFFAIRS: Hitler's Ten-Year War on the Jews (New 
York, Sept., 1943) 

POLISH MINISTRY OF INFORMATION: The Black Book of Poland (Putnam's, 

RICHARD WALTHER DARRE: Der Schweinemord (Zentralverlag der NSDAP 
Munchen, 1937) 

News of Norway, Vol. 2, No. 51 (Jan. 15, 1943) 

ENCE: Nutrition and Food Supply; The War and After (Jan., 1943) 

The Survey of Central and Eastern Europe, No. 7 (Dec., 1942) 

EMIL LUDWIG: The Germans: History of a Nation (Little, Brown & Co., 

SIR ROBERT VANSITTART: The Black Record (The Musson Book Co. Ltd., 
Toronto, 1941) 

WILFRED FLEISHER: Volcanic Isle (Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1941) 

Vol. 1, p. 913 


CHARLES SEYMOUR: Intimate Papers of Colonel House (Houghton, Mifflin 
Co., 1926) 

ALBERT SHAW: "The Messages and Papers of Woodrow Wilson" (The 
Review of Reviews Corp., 1924) 

JULIUS CAESAR : Bellum Gallicum, Book VI. 
TACITUS : De Germania 

JEAN FROISSART: Chronicles of England, Spain, France and the Adjoining 
Countries (Leavitt & Allen, New York, 1855) 

N. GANGULEE: The Mind and Face of Nazi Germany (John Murray, Lon- 
don, 1942) 

MACHIAVELLI : The Historical, Political and Diplomatic Writings of Machi- 
avelli (J. R. Osgood & Co., Boston, 1882) 

GEORG WILHELM FRIEDRICH HEGEL: Philosophy of History (1857) 
AUSTIN HARRISON : The Pan-Germanic Doctrine (Harper & Bro., 1904) 


PAUL ROHRBACH : Deutschland Unter den Weltvolkern (Stuttgart, 1921) 

The German Reich and Americans of German Origin (Oxford University 
Press, 1938) 

HEINRICH VON TREITSCHKE: Politics (Macmillan Co., 1916) 

EDGAR ANSEL MOWRER: Germany Puts the Clock Back (Wm. Morrow & 
Co., 1933) 

FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE: Thus SPake Zarathusra (Random House); Gene- 
ology of Morals (Random House) 

JOSEPH ARTHUR DE GOBINEAU: Moral and Intellectual Diversity of Races 
(Philadelphia, 1856) 

HOUSTON STEWART CHAMBERLAIN: Foundations of the Nineteenth Century 
(London, 1910) 

ALFRED ROSENBERG: Der Mythus des 20 Jahrhunderts (Munchen, 1932) 

WILHELM KUSSEROW : The Creed of the Nordic Race (Friends of Europe, 
London, 1936) 

ADOLF HITLER: Mein Kampf (Stackpole Sons, 1939) 

MOELLER VAN DER BRUCK i Germany's Third Empire 

OSWALD SPENGLER: Man and Technics (Alfred A. Knopf, 1932) 

ELMER DAVIS : Not to Mention the War (The Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1940) 

FRIEDRICH LEOPOLD HARDENBURG: Die Politischen Ideen des Novalis (Hei- 
delberg, 1940) 

PETER VIERECK: Metapolitics (Alfred A. Knopf, 1941) 

HERMANN RAUSCHNING: Hitler Speaks (T. Butterworth, Ltd., London, 
1940) ; The Revolution of Nihilism (Garden City Publ. Co., 1942) 

THOMAS MANN: "In Defense of Wagner" (Common Sense, Jan., 1940) 

I. A. R. WYLIE: My Life with George (Random House, 1940) 

HEINRICH HEINE : Religion and Philosophy (Trubner & Co., London, 1882) 

ANDRE CHERADAME: Defense of the Americas (Doubleday, Doran & Co., 

Grossdeutschland Und Metteleuropa um das Jahr 1950 

VON EINEM GROSSDEUTSCHER : Germania Triumphans (Berlin 1895) 

KLAUS MANN: The Two Germany* (Survey Graphic, Vol. 28, p. 478) 

JOHANN JOSEF GORRES: Germany and the Revolution (1820); Stigmata: 
A History of Various Cases (1883) 

"German Elections 1932", Encyclopedia of Europe, Vol. I (London, 1939) 
O. SEELER: Germania Und Ihre Kinder (C. Boysen, Hamburg, 1914) 

Verein von Freunden des Volkes und Vaterlandes (Avenarius & Mendels- 
sohn, 1851) 

WINSTON CHURCHILL: The Great War 1914-1918 (G. Newnes, Ltd., 
London, 1933-1934) 

RAY STANNARD BAKER : Woodrow Wilson and World Settlement (Double- 
day, Doran & Co., 1922) 


RAY STANNARD BAKER and WILLIAM DODD: The Public Papers of Wood 
row Wilson (Harper & Bros., 1925-1927) 

DAVID HUNTER MILLER: My Diary at the Conference of Paris (G. P. 
Putnam's Sons, 1928) 

The Peace That Failed: How Germany Sowed the Seed of War (Foreign 
Policy Association, 1942) 

Shadow Over Europe: The Challenge of Nazi Germany (Foreign Policy 
Association, 1939) 

HANS ERNEST FRIED : The Guilt of the German Army (Macmillan, 1942) 
ROM LANDAU : Hitler's Paradise (Faber & Faber, Ltd., London) 
FREDERICK C. OESCHNER: This Is the Enemy (Little, Brown & Co., 1942) 

CHARLES WARREN: "Punishment for War Guilt" (The New York Times, 
May 17, 1943) 

MORVAT : History of European Diplomacy, 1914-1924 


"Briand-Kellogg Pact", New International Encyclopedia, Supp. Vol. I, P. 
248, 595, 864 

DAVID HUNTER MILLER: The Peace Pact of Paris (G. P. Putnam's Sons, 

"League of Nations", New International Encyclopedia, Supp. Vol. I 

1934, together with the Report of the Relevant Proceedings 

SIR THOMAS BARCLAY : International Law and Practice (London, Sweet & 
Maxwell, Ltd., Boston, Mass.) 

The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 14 (1920) 
"International Law", Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 12 
"International Law*', Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 15 
"International Law", 33 Corpus Juris 383 

SIR FREDERICK SMITH : Treatise on International Law 5th Ed. (London & 
Toronto, 1918) 

HANNIS TAYLOR: Treatise on International Public Law (Chicago, 1901) 

ARTHUR K. KUHN : The Laws of War and the Future (Hague Conference 
on International Law, Aug. 30, 1921) 

"Federal Courts", 25 Corpus Juris 679 

The American Society of International Law, Vol. 14 (Oxford University 
Press, 1920) 

"International Law", Black's Law Dictionary 

JAMES W. GARNER : "Punishment of Offenders Against the Laws and Cus- 
toms of War" (14 American Journal of International Law, p. 70, 1920) 

"Heirn v. Bridault", 37 Miss. 230 


"U. S. v. White", (C. C.) 27 Fed. 201 

Fix Atrocities on Ex-Kaiser (The Neiv York Times, Jan. 19, 1919) 

"Schooner Exchange v. McFaddon and Others", 7 Cranch. 116 

"DeHaber v. Queen of Portugal", 17 Q. B. 171 

"Hatch v. Baez", 7 Hun 596 

"Underbill v. Hernandez", 168 U. S. 250 

CHARLES SEYMOUR: Intimate Papers of Colonel House (Houghton-Mifflin 
Co., 1926) 

CHARLES WARREN: "Punishment of War Guilt" (The New York Times, 
May 17, 1943) 

JOHN HENNESSEY WALKER: "Punishing the War Guilty Will Not Be A 
Simple Job", (PM, Nov. 15, 1942) 

VICTOR BERNSTEIN : "The Kaiser Didn't Hang" (PM, March 22, 1943) 

HEINZ POL: The Hidden Enemy: The German Threat to Post-War Peace 
(Julian Messner, 1943) 

SHELDON GLUECK: "Trial and Punishment of the Axis War Criminals" 
(Free World, Nov., 1942) 

F. WILHELM SOLLMAN: "How to Deal with Germany" (World Affairs, 
June, 1942) 

Bethmann-Holwegg, Former Chancellor, Testifies Evasively. Secret Ses- 
sion is Declared (The New York Times, Nov. 6, 1919) 

Von Kapelle, Von Koch and Helfferich Praise the Old Regime (The New 
York Times, Nov. 14, 1919) 

Students Refuse to Permit Von Hindenburg to Appear (The New York 
Times, Nov. 15, 1919) 

Helfferich Refuses to Answer Questions (The New York Times, Nov. 
17, 1919) 

Hindenburg Finally Testifies (The New York Times, Nov. 19, 1919) 
Hjalmar Branting Reports (The New York Times, Dec. 22, 1919) 

Von Lersner Refuses to Surrender Prisoners (The New York Times, Nov. 
29, 1919) 

Prince Rupprecht Offers to Surrender in Exchange for German War Pris- 
oners (The New York Times, Dec. 9, 1919) 

German National Assembly Enacts Law to Try Germans in German Court 
(The New York Times, Dec. 20, 1919; Jan. 26, 1920) 

German Council Refuses Demand for Extradition (The New York Times, 
Feb. 6, 1920) 

German Officers Association Calls Nation to Defiance (The New York 
Times, Feb. 8, 1920) 

University Students in Berlin Oppose Surrender (The New York Times, 
Feb. 12, 19, 1920) 

German National Assembly in Weimar Supports Government Against Ex- 
tradition (The New York Times, Feb. 10, 11, 1920) 


Attorney General at Leipzig Ordered to Try Accused (The New York 
Times, Feb. 11, 1920) 

Allies Accept Proposal to Try Criminals at Leipzig (The New York Times, 
Feb. 17, 1920) 

German Belgium Financial Agreement Annulled (The New York Times, 
Feb. 10, 1920) 

Allies Finally Request Trial of Less than 1000 Persons (The New York 
Times, Jan. 14, 1920) 

War Criminals Arrive at Switzerland and Holland (The New York Times, 
Jan. 14, 1920) 

CHANCELLOR PHILIP SCHEIDEMANN: Der Zusammenbruck (1921); Mem- 
oiren Ernes Sozialdemokraten (1928) 

"Harvard Research on International Law", Encyclopedia of the Social 
Sciences, p. 110 (1935) 

"Little v. Barreme", 2 Cranch. 170 

"Mitchell v. Harmony", 13 How. 115 

FRIEDERICH WILHELM FROEBEL, Education of Man (Berlin, 1862) 

DAVID HUNTER MILLER, My Diary at the Conference of Paris, Vol. 18, 
p. 9 (Privately printed) 

OPPENHEIM : International Law, Vol. 2, P. 455 

International Law Governing War (La Salle Extension University, 1920) 

WILFRED FLEISCHER: Volcanic Isle (Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1941) 

ALEXANDER M. BICKEL: "Fundamentals of a European Order" (Congress 
Weekly, April 2, 1943) 


J. B. CONDLIFFE: Agenda for a Post-War World (W. W. Norton & Co., 

JOHN BOYLAND : Sequel to the Apocalypse (Booktab, Inc., 1942) 
"Treaty of Versailles", Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 23 (1941) 
GUENTER REIMANN : Patents for Hitler (Vanguard Press, 1942) 

GORDON H. COLE: "Rebuilding Europe After the War" (PM, Dec. 20, 21, 22, 

"Report of Board of Economic Warfare of the United States" (The New 
York Times, April 28, 1943) 

WILLIAM HARBETT DAWSON: "Germany After the War" (The Contempo- 
rary Review, London, April, 1941) 

PAUL EINZIG: Can We Win the Peace? (Macmillan Co., 1942) 

ERNEST S. HEDIGER : Nasi Exploitation of Occupied Europe (Foreign Policy 
Association, 1941) 

LORD ROBERT VANSITTART : Lessons of My Life (Alfred A. Knopf, 1943) 

JOHN MAYNAED KEYNES: A Revision of the Treaty (Macmillan & Co., 
Ltd., London, 1922) ; The Economic Consequences of the Peace (Har- 
court, Brace & Co., 1920) 

LEOPOLD SCHWARZSCHILD: World in Trance (L. B. Fischer Publ. Corp., 

GEORGE N. SHUSTER: The Germans (Dial Press, 1932) 

P. E. CORBETT: Post-War Worlds (Farrar & Rinehart, 1942) 

JAMES EDWARD MEADE : An Economic Basis for a Durable Peace (G. Allen 
& Unwin, Ltd., London, 1940) 

KINGSBURY SMITH: "Our Plan for Post- War Germany" (American Mer- 
cury, April, 1943) 

EUGENE STALEY : World Economy in Transition (Council on Foreign Rela- 
tions, New York, 1939) 

EDWARD HALLETT CARR : Conditions of Peace (Macmillan Co., 1942) 

JOSEPH BORKIN and CHARLES A. WELSH: Germany's Master Plan: A 
Story of Industrial Offensive (Duell, Sloan & Pearce, 1943) 

NICHOLAS DOMAN: The Coming Age of World Control (Harper & Bro., 

Food Conference (The New York Times, Nov. 9, 1943) 

WALTER LIPPMAN: "European Relief and the U. S. A. (The New York 
Herald Tribune, Nov. 9, 1943) 

JOHANNES STEEL: "Nazi Grip on Capital Will Be Hard to Break" (The 
New York Post, Apr. 27, 1943) 

EMIL J. FELDEN: Eines Menschen Weg: A Biography of Fredirich Eiber 

DR. JOSEPH TENENBAUM : American Investments and Business Interests in 
Germany (Joint Boycott Council, New York, 1939) 

HENRY AGARD WALLACE: Statement (The New York Times, Sept 19, 

FRITZ THYSSEN: I Paid Hitler (Farrar & Rinehart, 1941) 

HERBERT HOOVER and HUGH GIBSON: The Problems of Lasting Peace 
(Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1942) 

ANTHONY EDEN: "Post-War Problems Call for Sacrifice, Courage and 
Skill" (The British Information Services, Aug. 5, 1942) 


FRIEDRICH WILHELIC FROEBXL: Education of Man (Berlin, 1862) 

ADOLF LAS SON: Das Kulturideal und der Krieg (H. Neelmeyer, Berlin, 

HERBERT AGAR : A Time for Greatness (Little Brown & Co., 1942) 
Louis ADAMIC: Two-Way Passage (Harper & Bro., 1941) 
RICHARD M. BRICKNER: Is Germany Incurable f (Lippincott, 1943) 


H. G. WELLS: The Rights of Man (Penguin Books, 1940) ; The Outline 
of History (Macmillan, 1940) 

F. WILHELM SOLLMAN: "How to Deal with Germany" (World Affairs, 
June, 1942) 

"The Nazi Primer" (Harper's Magazine, Vol. 177, p. 240) 

KLAUS MANN : "The Two Germanys" (Survey-Graphic, Vol. 28, p. 478) 

BERTRAND RUSSELL: "Re-educating the Entire Human Family" (Fort- 
nightly Review, London) 

TANIA LONG: "German Re-education Plan Issued by a British Group" (The 
New York Times) 

HEINRICH HAUSER: Battle Against Time (Scribner, 1939) 

JAN DE GROOT: "What Is Germany?" (The Commonweal, April 25, 1941) 

WILLIAM HARLAN HALE: "Ten Years of Hitler; One Hundred Years of 
Goethe" (The Nation, March 16, 1942) 

SIR NORMAL ANGELL: "Responsibility, Punishment, Reparation" (The Dial, 
Dec. 28, 1918) 

FREDERIC C. HOWE: "The Background of Modern Germany (Scribner' s 
Magazine, July, 1915) 

SAMUEL LAING: Notes of a Traveller (Carey & Hart, 1846) 

HENRY AGARD WALLACE: "The People's Revolution" (The New Republic, 
May 25, 1942) 

JACK CHERRY: Once and For All (Muller, London, 1942) 

EDGAR ANSEL MOWRER: "Germany After Ten Years" (Harper's Magazine, 
Dec., 1928) 

ERIKA MANN : School for Barbarians (Modern Age, New York, 1938) 
DOROTHY THOMPSON: Listen, Hans (Houghton, Miffiin Co., 1943) 
PAUL HAGEN: Will Germany Crack? (Harper & Bros.. 1942) 

REX STOUT: "We Shall Hate, or We Shall Fail" (The New York Times 
Magazine, Jan. 17, 1943) 

ARTHUR K. KUHN : The Laws of War and the Future (Hague Conference 
on International Law, Aug. 30, 1921) 

PATZY ZIEMER: Two Thousand and Ten Days of Hitler (Harper & Co., 

ALBERT EINSTEIN: Interview (PM, January 4, 1943) 


J. B. CONDLIFFE: Agenda for a Post-War World (W. W. Norton & Co., 

NICHOLAS DOMAN: The Coming Age of World Control (Harper & Bro., 

P. E. CORBETT: Post-War Worlds (Farrar & Rinehart, 1942) 

WALTER LIPPMANN: United States Foreign Policy: Shield of the Republic 
(Little, Brown & Co., 1943) 

LIONEL CURTIS : Civitas Dei (Macmillan & Co., Ltd., London, 1943) 
CLARENCE STREIT: Union Now (Harper & Bro., 1942) 

RICHARD N. COUDENHOVE-KALERGI : Crusade for Pan-Europe (G. P. Put- 
nam's Sons, 1943) 

HOWARD K. SMITH: Last Train from Berlin (Alfred A. Knopf, 1942) 
ROBERT STRAUSZ-HUPE : Geopolitics (G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1942) 
CARL J. HAMBRO: How to Win the Peace (J. B. Lippincott Co., 1942) 

ANDRE CHERDAME: Defense of the Americas (Doubleday, Doran & Co., 

FRANCIS JOHN MCCONNELL: A Basis for the Peace to Come (Abingdon- 
Cokesbury Press, 1942) 

GEOFFREY BOURNE: War Politics and Emotions (Liveright Publishing Corp., 

RAOUL DE ROUSSY DE SALES: Making of Tomorrow (Reynal & Hitch- 
cock, 1942) 

SIR THOMAS BARCLAY: Problems of International Practice and Diplomacy 
(Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1917) 

OSWALD GARRISON VILLARD: "Preparation for the Peace" (Christian 
Century, Jan. 21, 1942) 

JULIAN HUXLEY: "On Living in a Revolution" (Harper's Magazine, 
Sept., 1942) 

G. O. G. LUETKENS : A New Order for Germany (National Peace Council, 
London, 1941) 


DOROTHY THOMPSON: Listen Hans (Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1943) 
LORD ROBERT VANSITTART : Lessons of My Life (Alfred A. Knopf, 1943) 
HAROLD J. LASKI: Where Do We Go From Here? (Penguin Books, 1941) 
Louis P. LOCHNER: What About Germany? (Dodd, Mead & Co., 1942) 
The New World (Council for Democracy, 1942) 



v r ' - . 


3 5132 00254 3643 

University of the Pacific Library 

tfizer, Louis. 

What to do with